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 terms " extremist", " terrorist" and " freedom fighter" should be avoided or used with care. Editors discussing the use of these terms are advised to familiarize themselves with the guideline, and discuss objections at the relevant talkpage, not here. If you feel this article represents an exception, then that discussion properly belongs here. |
Locked, so I can't edit it myself, but under Product, there's this: However, when tested in India, the product failed miserably:
We used it on a captive crowd consisting of CRPF personnel and general public. But they managed to tolerate the smell without much difficulty. [...] Those who can ignore [the] smell can drink the liquid also. [9]
But the footnote goes to an article that doesn't mention India, so it needs to be removed. Probable vandalism.
This page is about police equipment. Publishing time and again where it was used is propaganda, not information. Ever all there is controversy over using it, thus it should stay. But otherwise writing about specific incidents is already falls into propaganda and is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.173.248.250 ( talk) 17:20, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
You leave relevant information out of the introduction and put in info that is clearly political. Can a mediator do something about this abuse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashtul ( talk • contribs) 09:01, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
ashtul. Your attempt to 'mind' this page and keep it purely 'technical', as though it were a just a product with specifications that can be marketed via the venue of Wikipedia, suggests that you might have a personal link to the manufacturer. Do you? If so, please read the relevant policy I have cited in the header. Thank You. Nishidani ( talk) 14:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
A request for mediation for the use of this page as anti-Israeli propaganda was filed. Ashtul ( talk) 13:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani rejected the request for mediation.
http://www.0404.co.il/post/18559
Please stop adding this misinformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashtul ( talk • contribs) 16:14, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
One report claims that police dispersed an Haredi protest meeting in Jerusalem by dousing demonstrators with the liquid. ref= Itzik Weiss, 'Discharging skunk at Haredi protesters in Jerusalem,' 9 October 2014
The two sources state that from 2008-2013/2014, skunk appears to have been used exclusively against Palestinians
B’Tselem’s observations show that security forces often spray the Skunk at protest marches and demonstrations as a preliminary method of dispersal, even when the demonstrations are quiet and no stones have been thrown. B’Tselem does not know of any cases in which security forces used the Skunk at a demonstration with only Jewish or Israeli participants. Many Palestinian demonstrators have expressed indignation at the humiliation caused by exposure to the Skunk.p.36
They say that skunk water, which smells unbearably bad when fresh but is physically harmless, allows them to disperse crowds effectively and identify suspects later. "The skunk water cannons are used as a non-lethal weapon when Palestinians are involved in rioting, throwing petrol bombs and stones against police officers", says Micky Rosenfeld, a police spokesman. However, Palestinians in eastern neighbourhoods say police spray the greyish liquid indiscriminately into shops, restaurants and hotels, in a stream powerful enough to break windows, and describe it as one of many heavy-handed tactics Israeli authorities do not deploy in the city's Jewish west, underscoring their inferior status.
Ashtul found a source which suggests (the video does not) that skunk was once used against a Haredi group in early October 2014.
Rather than, as I suggested, add this information (it may not be RS by the way, but I suggest it may be used) to the page, you removed what both B'tselem and Reed stated. Whatever the truth of this obscure report, it remains a fact that (a) B'tselem had never heard of skunk being used against Israelis from 2008-2013 (May) (b) that the police spokesman cited by Reed in November 2014 said that it is used when Palestinians are involved (d) Palestinians are not aware of it being used in the Western half of Jerusalem. Therefore, both the Israeli report of one apparent instance of it being used in West Jerusalem, and the other reports, suitably modulated, must be used. Nishidani ( talk) 20:50, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Suggested solution along the lines.'B'tselem found no evidence skunk had been used against Jewish or Israeli protestors (2008-2013). John Reed cites a police spokesman as saying it is used in riots where Palestinians are involved' and stated that Palestinians believe it is not used in Western Jerusalem. Yitzhak Weiss has reported that skunk was used against Haredi protests on the 4th of October 2014.' etc. Nishidani ( talk) 20:50, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
(1) Sources that fail WP:RS and may fall under WP:Fringe
Michael T. McRay, Letters from "Apartheid Street": A Christian Peacemaker in Occupied Palestine, Wipf and Stock Publishers 2013 pp.56
The publisher is perfectly respectable, and the writer is a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams. The details describe what the Christian pacifist observed on that day.
(2) remove information not in source
This is deceit operated at the pseudo-cleverest level. In his first revert Plot Spoiler removed the source by Michael T. McRay. In his second revert, he then removes information saying that it is not in the source. Of course not. The source which contained it was removed in his prior edit.
The incident is Sunday February 26 ‘The protesters began arriving close to 11:30 and by 12:15, ..calling for an end to apartheid and the reopening of Shuhada street p.57 ‘Two hours after the chaos began, Chris, Carrie, and I decided to leave. . .A horrid stench greeted us as we walked back into the Old City. The military had showered the houses with Skunk, and spray that smells like it sounds. I heard that the smell lingers on for years and does not easily wash off skin. The city smelled of chemical waste. As I said before, the occupation reeks.pp.58-9
Unless there are serious objections here, this material preemptively removed without discussion should be reintroduced. Drive-by reverts and erasures with purely assumptional declarations that this or that is not RS are an abuse. Nishidani ( talk) 21:16, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
MSDS use is very specific and the fact the info is on there doesn't proof is it dangerous! Did you ever read the warning on an average medicine you take? Placing it here is biased and misleading.
It isn't as misleading as the 'do not swallow' part deleted, as it does actually deal with toxicity but still, it is more propaganda then a helpful fact. Ashtul ( talk) 13:17, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Contrary to the reported remarks of David Ben Harosh, the product's safety sheet contains a warning not to swallow the liquid
I think every editor involved in the discussion needs to go to the front desk or the facilities department at work and ask to look at the MSDS. You will find your favorite soap with a scary amount of warnings in there. I'm not saying the product is harmful or not. I'm just saying that MSDS is designed to be worrisome like your building evacuation plans and monthly walkthroughs on your fire extinguishers. Don't even get me started on the integrity of ceiling panels in your office since the burn rate does impact the building's overall fire resistance standard. I think I am basically trying to say is that MSDS is important from an OSHA standpoint but means nothing when determining if a chemical compound is truly harmful. Source: I'm a Facilities Manager and look how fun this is: [1] if you really ant to get look at the sheet: [2] Cptnono ( talk) 05:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
1 MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET ( MSDS ) Skunk Repulsive odor liquid Odortec Ltd Producer :002 ……………….. Emergency call No. : . Address : Aviezer 121/1 99860 Israel Tel: 02-9922364 Fax: 02-9912190 U.N. No. : None NFPA Hazard Rating : 0.0.0 Emergency action code : 1R IMO Hazard group : Not advised Stationary Phase : Liquid Solubility in water : Soluble
Section II : contain Water, Yeasts, Sodium Bicarbonate (Baking Soda). Section III: Major hazards At the pH level of sodium bicarbonate the yeasts synthesise some amino acids causing heavy odor. Skin: Might cause irritation. Eyes: redness, pain. Ingestion: abdominal pain. Inhalation: No vapors at normal use.
Section IV - FIRST AID PROCEDURES : Never give fluids or induce vomiting if patients unconscious or having convulsions. Ingestion: If swallowed give fluids, don’t induce vomiting, consult a physician who will decide on need and method for emptying the stomach or any other medical care. Eye: Rinse with water for at least 15 min. If the pain continues, get medical consultation. Skin: 2 Wash off with running water or shower. Wash contaminated clothing before reuse. Inhalation: If will effects occur, remove to fresh air. If not breathing give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen, call a physician or any available medical help. Section V - Fire and Explosion Hazard Data Flash point (°C) 20 : non applicable. Self ignition point: non applicable LEL (%) Irrelevant UEL (%) Irrelevant
Fire extinguishing The product itself is a good fire extinguisher! Hazardous decomposition products: When exposed to open fire may emit Carbon diOxide and some Carbon monOxide (at air deficiency). Section VI - Spill & Leak Procedures Small spillage should be let to evaporate. Large spillage should be collected into an adsorbent for disposal at an authorized approved landfill. Section VII - Storage Store containers well closed in a well-ventilated area. Do not store in area exposed to sunlight. Keep separate from acids.
Section VIII - Personal Protection Information Ventilation : Good general ventilation should be sufficient for most conditions. Respiratory Protection : When airborne exposure guidelines and/or comfort levels may be exceeded, use an approved air-purifying respirator (if needed). Eye Contact : 3 For high potential exposure chemical goggles or full face screen are recommended because eye contact with this material may cause some pains or eyes irritate. For low and moderate potential exposure use safety glasses. Protective Clothing : For brief contact, no precautions other than clean body covering clothing should be needed. Use cotton gloves when prolonged or frequently repeated contact could occur. Section IX - Chemical & physical properties Formula (Baking Soda): NaHCO3. Mol. Weight : 84.01 Color : Green. Odor : Strong smell. Boiling point (oC) : 101.01 Freezing point (oC) : -7 Vapor pressure: Negligible Phase: Solution and aquanauts Flash point: Not flammable. Section X - Reactivity & Stability Stable and does not decomposes up to 250ºC. Materials to avoid: Light metals and strong oxidizing agents. Section XI - Toxicological Data The product has not been reported as toxic material. No carcinogenic activity. Does not affect sensitive aquatic population. Section XII - Ecologic environmental data. Sodium bicarbonate and yeast are friendly products in environment. Both do not impose to heavy burden to it’s survivals.
Section XIII: Disposal considerations Both ingredients of the product are not poisonous materials. In case of spillage one may dispose them to the municipal disposal unless authorities require a different waste treatment. 4 Section XIV: Transport regulations DOT No special requirements IMO Not found IYATA Not regulated Labeling:
According to self-classifications. Symbol: - Indication of danger (irritating material) Special risks: Mild irritant Safety advice: Do not swallow Avoid contact with eyes.
Product shipping regulation Sipping name : Risk group : Non hazardous Failure limits :
Section: XV other regulations \s and directives
Safety codes: R36 – Irritating to eyes.
Spillage [0], Chemical and Physical activity [0], Flammability [0].
5
Section XVI other general information
W A R R A N T Y
The information herein is based on the literature and experience
concerning with this subject, is given in good faith and to the best of our
knowledge but no warrant , express or implied , is made.
This material safety data sheet was issued on the 12 th September, 2004. REVISION #1 'on the 9th September, 2008.
I gave some damn good reasoning for MSDS meaning nothing. However, we go by RS. The weight given to certain sources is questionable . This product could easily be good or bad. What matters is that is that we can write an article with no worries about that. If you focus on the actual product then the history of use will (and should) take a lesser role as the reader sees it. There will definitely be a history section. "Propaganda" (take offence if you want, Nish, but several editors have said it) can take a back seat. How about you lay out some generally sourced info instead of playing defense, Ashtul? Cptnono ( talk) 07:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
The label of Skunk says "Do not swallow" and MSDS first aid warns for ingestion: "If swallowed give fluids, don’t induce vomiting, consult a physician who will decide on need and method for emptying the stomach or any other medical care", for eyes "Rinse with water for at least 15 min. If the pain continues, get medical consultation", for skin "Wash off with running water or shower. Wash contaminated clothing" and for inhalation: "If will effects occur, remove to fresh air. If not breathing give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen, call a physician or any available medical help. before reuse".
There are two reasons. It is citing a primary source, whereas we have a secondary source, and the latter are to be preferred over the former. And it looks like a machine translation. (c) This is an encyclopedia, not an advertising site for the firm. Nishidani ( talk) 15:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
MENAHEM KAHANA, 'ISRAEL-POLITICS-MILITARY-JUDAISM-ARREST-DEMO,' referred to Getty Images has a comment by the photographer Menahem Kahana below it, in a caption, and this is used to source the idea that it has been used multiple times (so far, with this, twice) against Haredi crowds. This is not an RS news source as far as I can see. The information is worth including. My problem is, editors are complaining of my use of video and photographic evidence re its use against Palestinians, from Mondoweiss and +972 magazine, while not raising objections to the additions from Menahem Kahana or News 0404, which deal with its use against Haredi. Cptono, I would appreciate it if could you look at this discrepancy. I dislike incongruency (personally I accept the Kahana and Yitzhak Weiss material, but it has arguably no better or less RS status than the sources I added, and which a majority want removed as non-RS). Nishidani ( talk) 18:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
'It was told to not wash off easily and linger on clothes for up to five years'.
This is hilarious in English, meaning that skunk was informed not to wash itself, but rather to linger on (in lingerie?) for years. I can't fix it today because of 1R, but it evidently should read.
'It is said not to be easy to wash off, and to linger in clothes for upwards of five years'. Nishidani ( talk) 18:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
To avoid edit warring let's try to note down and sort out some of the outstanding issues. I'd appreciate input, a list of suggestions of things that might be done to improve the page. By the way there is a New Zealand product called skunk apparently that the LA Times mentions as on sale to police forces. Nishidani ( talk) 20:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Worth keeping probably but removing from EL
Cptnono ( talk) 06:33, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
(copied from Talk:Gaza Strip#RS: double standards?)
- "... The most "comic" is Nishidani's reply - glibly (as usual) blaming those whom he doesn't like, in parallel, he added to the Skunk his favorite, but so controversial, Mondoweiss.
- However, his response from a man who allows himself such next false accusations and boorish remarks to his opponent as :
- isn't relevant at all, and should be of interest to administrators, if they ever will be found. :( -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 16:41, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- As I see, this discussion may be interested to Sean.hoyland who just now has reverted the Talk:Skunk (weapon) article to Nishidani's version :( -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 16:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- You are not constructively contributing to the building of articles, Igorp. Your talk page expositions are garbled, ill-focused, and difficult to reply to, and you frequently revert me, as do several pseudo-editors recycled from the past, without any talk page rationale or comprehensible edit-summary. This may not be purposive, but when repeated as a pattern, it figures as a controlled provocation, trying to elicit some impatience, which, in the case you cite, it did. That edit was totally unmotivated. If you want to edit wiki, learn collegiality. Nishidani ( talk) 16:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notification but no, it doesn't interest me I'm afraid. I don't make content edits, write articles or participate in article talk page discussions anymore. People who have no personal connection to the Israel-Palestine conflict are best placed to determine the RS status of the source in this context in my view. I'm just reverting an obvious sock. I believe youngsters might refer to it as "fucking someone's shit up". It's a far more productive way to contribute to ARBPIA given the state of affairs as far as I'm concerned. It's also my way of supporting Israel by nullifying the presence of people who make Israel supporters look bad so that editors don't have the same experience as me. For example, when I started editing Wikipedia I was opposed to BDS, but years of exposure to many of the people who come here to advocate for the State of Israel helped to make me a firm supporter of BDS. This is probably not a good thing. Anyway, I shall go back to my Paul Auster novel, the 7th Auster novel I've read in the last few weeks, thanks in part to all that extra time not spent dealing with ethno-nationalist activists on Wikipedia. Sean.hoyland - talk 17:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- @ Sean.hoyland: I's really sad for me to hear that some/ones/thing made you "a firm supporter of BDS" with such its deals as "Spain condemns cancellation of Jewish musician Matisyahu at reggae festival", etc. Not so sad is your awareness that "This is probably not a good thing" :) Regarding to your 'ethno-nationalist activists on Wikipedia' definition: I see it (my own activity as min) in another way: to reflect what is / was happened as closely as possible to reality - without clichés and false versions.
- Returning to a "Mondoweiss' case", let's continue in Talk:Skunk (weapon). -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 14:32, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
-- Igorp_lj ( talk) 14:56, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
I have made two changes. First, dropped the Mondoweiss source because there are two sources already. Secondly, removed "according to Ma'an" as unneeded. Ma'an is simply reporting testimony from witnesses. The JPost source also refers obliquely to "riot-dispersal means". There is little doubt that Skunk was used, see for instance the photos here, among other places. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 17:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to correct the URL to the first citation, " http://whoprofits.org/sites/default/files/weapons_report-8.pdf", which currently returns an incorrect web page, with the following correct URL: " https://whoprofits.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/old/weapons_report-8.pdf". Thanks Ikerus ( talk) 12:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Would it be possible to make the statement "We used it on a captive crowd consisting of CRPF personnel and general public." link to Central Reserve Police Force? Algotr ( talk) 13:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Wow, good thing this brilliant article is protected. When something is so perfect, any edit would be a disimprovement. What if some stupid editor decided that mentioning the story about India once is enough? Wouldn't that suck?
It says it is used against Palestinians when in fact it’s used against any violent demonstrations wether Palestinian or not. Change this immediately, remove “Palestinian”. I’m not trying to get political but I am trying to point out bias, propaganda and misleading statements. Jake pres ( talk) 02:28, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
It says it’s used for collective punishment, the source for this is a biased source that opposes Israel. Either bring a more trustable source or remove. Jake pres ( talk) 02:31, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Somebody interested in adding the Hebrew name - Bo'esh (בואש), too? 138.246.3.234 ( talk) 09:31, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can you add the Skunk attack by former IDF soldiers on Columbia University Students who were peacefully protesting the Genocide of Palestinians? It happened Jan 19th, 2024 2600:1017:B825:38D2:3580:32EB:2B99:7B3B ( talk) 20:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Here are five reliable sources on the alleged use of Skunk at Columbia:
-- Mox La Push ( talk) 03:55, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
In December 2017, Haaretz reported: Skunk is liable to cause physical harm, such as intense nausea, vomiting and skin rashes, in addition to any injury resulting from the powerful force of the spray. Examinations by police and army medical teams in the past also indicated that the excessive coughing caused by exposure can result in suffocation.
This section is sourced by a random Haaretz article that provides no actual evidence other than "examinations by police and army medical teams" which is meaningless without providing proof of this. I could find zero data to back up that sunk is deadly. Aj67876 ( talk) 04:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
The verifiability/clarity of parts of this section is currently [3] somewhat problematic.
The company sells a special soap – available to authorities but not the general public – that neutralises the smell of skunk water if officers are accidentally sprayed. It has been suggested that rubbing a surface contaminated with skunk with ketchup, similar to getting rid of a real skunk spray with tomato juice, and then washing it off, may diminish perception of the odor (due to the effects of olfactory fatigue [1]). [2] In 1993, [3] American chemist Paul Krebaum developed a compound that chemically neutralizes natural skunk spray by changing the odor-causing thiols into odorless acids. This compound can be prepared as a mixture of: 1 quart of 3% hydrogen peroxide, ¼ cup of baking soda, and 1-2 teaspoons of liquid dish soap. [1]
- ^ a b Vantassel SM, Hygnstrom SE, Ferraro DM (2011). "Removing Skunk Odor" (PDF). NebGuide (UNL Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources). G2100. University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Retrieved 21 January 2024.
- ^ "Who, What, Why: What is skunk water?". BBC News. September 11, 2015.
- ^ Forbes, JE (March 1995). "The tip of the month" (PDF). The Probe (152). Hopland, CA: National Animal Damage Control Association: 2.
86.180.70.36 ( talk) 12:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
In the opening paragraph we have "The liquid's strong odor is marketed as an improvement over other crowd control weapons (CCWs) such as rubber bullets and tear gas used by the IDF against Palestinian protestors. The IDF is criticized for its tactics during deployment, including common use against people, businesses, and neighborhoods not involved in protests as a form of collective punishment."
I can't see the need for anything after"(CCWs)". Can en editor step in? 92.62.1.33 ( talk) 22:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated B-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 terms " extremist", " terrorist" and " freedom fighter" should be avoided or used with care. Editors discussing the use of these terms are advised to familiarize themselves with the guideline, and discuss objections at the relevant talkpage, not here. If you feel this article represents an exception, then that discussion properly belongs here. |
Locked, so I can't edit it myself, but under Product, there's this: However, when tested in India, the product failed miserably:
We used it on a captive crowd consisting of CRPF personnel and general public. But they managed to tolerate the smell without much difficulty. [...] Those who can ignore [the] smell can drink the liquid also. [9]
But the footnote goes to an article that doesn't mention India, so it needs to be removed. Probable vandalism.
This page is about police equipment. Publishing time and again where it was used is propaganda, not information. Ever all there is controversy over using it, thus it should stay. But otherwise writing about specific incidents is already falls into propaganda and is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.173.248.250 ( talk) 17:20, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
You leave relevant information out of the introduction and put in info that is clearly political. Can a mediator do something about this abuse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashtul ( talk • contribs) 09:01, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
ashtul. Your attempt to 'mind' this page and keep it purely 'technical', as though it were a just a product with specifications that can be marketed via the venue of Wikipedia, suggests that you might have a personal link to the manufacturer. Do you? If so, please read the relevant policy I have cited in the header. Thank You. Nishidani ( talk) 14:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
A request for mediation for the use of this page as anti-Israeli propaganda was filed. Ashtul ( talk) 13:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani rejected the request for mediation.
http://www.0404.co.il/post/18559
Please stop adding this misinformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashtul ( talk • contribs) 16:14, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
One report claims that police dispersed an Haredi protest meeting in Jerusalem by dousing demonstrators with the liquid. ref= Itzik Weiss, 'Discharging skunk at Haredi protesters in Jerusalem,' 9 October 2014
The two sources state that from 2008-2013/2014, skunk appears to have been used exclusively against Palestinians
B’Tselem’s observations show that security forces often spray the Skunk at protest marches and demonstrations as a preliminary method of dispersal, even when the demonstrations are quiet and no stones have been thrown. B’Tselem does not know of any cases in which security forces used the Skunk at a demonstration with only Jewish or Israeli participants. Many Palestinian demonstrators have expressed indignation at the humiliation caused by exposure to the Skunk.p.36
They say that skunk water, which smells unbearably bad when fresh but is physically harmless, allows them to disperse crowds effectively and identify suspects later. "The skunk water cannons are used as a non-lethal weapon when Palestinians are involved in rioting, throwing petrol bombs and stones against police officers", says Micky Rosenfeld, a police spokesman. However, Palestinians in eastern neighbourhoods say police spray the greyish liquid indiscriminately into shops, restaurants and hotels, in a stream powerful enough to break windows, and describe it as one of many heavy-handed tactics Israeli authorities do not deploy in the city's Jewish west, underscoring their inferior status.
Ashtul found a source which suggests (the video does not) that skunk was once used against a Haredi group in early October 2014.
Rather than, as I suggested, add this information (it may not be RS by the way, but I suggest it may be used) to the page, you removed what both B'tselem and Reed stated. Whatever the truth of this obscure report, it remains a fact that (a) B'tselem had never heard of skunk being used against Israelis from 2008-2013 (May) (b) that the police spokesman cited by Reed in November 2014 said that it is used when Palestinians are involved (d) Palestinians are not aware of it being used in the Western half of Jerusalem. Therefore, both the Israeli report of one apparent instance of it being used in West Jerusalem, and the other reports, suitably modulated, must be used. Nishidani ( talk) 20:50, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Suggested solution along the lines.'B'tselem found no evidence skunk had been used against Jewish or Israeli protestors (2008-2013). John Reed cites a police spokesman as saying it is used in riots where Palestinians are involved' and stated that Palestinians believe it is not used in Western Jerusalem. Yitzhak Weiss has reported that skunk was used against Haredi protests on the 4th of October 2014.' etc. Nishidani ( talk) 20:50, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
(1) Sources that fail WP:RS and may fall under WP:Fringe
Michael T. McRay, Letters from "Apartheid Street": A Christian Peacemaker in Occupied Palestine, Wipf and Stock Publishers 2013 pp.56
The publisher is perfectly respectable, and the writer is a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams. The details describe what the Christian pacifist observed on that day.
(2) remove information not in source
This is deceit operated at the pseudo-cleverest level. In his first revert Plot Spoiler removed the source by Michael T. McRay. In his second revert, he then removes information saying that it is not in the source. Of course not. The source which contained it was removed in his prior edit.
The incident is Sunday February 26 ‘The protesters began arriving close to 11:30 and by 12:15, ..calling for an end to apartheid and the reopening of Shuhada street p.57 ‘Two hours after the chaos began, Chris, Carrie, and I decided to leave. . .A horrid stench greeted us as we walked back into the Old City. The military had showered the houses with Skunk, and spray that smells like it sounds. I heard that the smell lingers on for years and does not easily wash off skin. The city smelled of chemical waste. As I said before, the occupation reeks.pp.58-9
Unless there are serious objections here, this material preemptively removed without discussion should be reintroduced. Drive-by reverts and erasures with purely assumptional declarations that this or that is not RS are an abuse. Nishidani ( talk) 21:16, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
MSDS use is very specific and the fact the info is on there doesn't proof is it dangerous! Did you ever read the warning on an average medicine you take? Placing it here is biased and misleading.
It isn't as misleading as the 'do not swallow' part deleted, as it does actually deal with toxicity but still, it is more propaganda then a helpful fact. Ashtul ( talk) 13:17, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Contrary to the reported remarks of David Ben Harosh, the product's safety sheet contains a warning not to swallow the liquid
I think every editor involved in the discussion needs to go to the front desk or the facilities department at work and ask to look at the MSDS. You will find your favorite soap with a scary amount of warnings in there. I'm not saying the product is harmful or not. I'm just saying that MSDS is designed to be worrisome like your building evacuation plans and monthly walkthroughs on your fire extinguishers. Don't even get me started on the integrity of ceiling panels in your office since the burn rate does impact the building's overall fire resistance standard. I think I am basically trying to say is that MSDS is important from an OSHA standpoint but means nothing when determining if a chemical compound is truly harmful. Source: I'm a Facilities Manager and look how fun this is: [1] if you really ant to get look at the sheet: [2] Cptnono ( talk) 05:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
1 MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET ( MSDS ) Skunk Repulsive odor liquid Odortec Ltd Producer :002 ……………….. Emergency call No. : . Address : Aviezer 121/1 99860 Israel Tel: 02-9922364 Fax: 02-9912190 U.N. No. : None NFPA Hazard Rating : 0.0.0 Emergency action code : 1R IMO Hazard group : Not advised Stationary Phase : Liquid Solubility in water : Soluble
Section II : contain Water, Yeasts, Sodium Bicarbonate (Baking Soda). Section III: Major hazards At the pH level of sodium bicarbonate the yeasts synthesise some amino acids causing heavy odor. Skin: Might cause irritation. Eyes: redness, pain. Ingestion: abdominal pain. Inhalation: No vapors at normal use.
Section IV - FIRST AID PROCEDURES : Never give fluids or induce vomiting if patients unconscious or having convulsions. Ingestion: If swallowed give fluids, don’t induce vomiting, consult a physician who will decide on need and method for emptying the stomach or any other medical care. Eye: Rinse with water for at least 15 min. If the pain continues, get medical consultation. Skin: 2 Wash off with running water or shower. Wash contaminated clothing before reuse. Inhalation: If will effects occur, remove to fresh air. If not breathing give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen, call a physician or any available medical help. Section V - Fire and Explosion Hazard Data Flash point (°C) 20 : non applicable. Self ignition point: non applicable LEL (%) Irrelevant UEL (%) Irrelevant
Fire extinguishing The product itself is a good fire extinguisher! Hazardous decomposition products: When exposed to open fire may emit Carbon diOxide and some Carbon monOxide (at air deficiency). Section VI - Spill & Leak Procedures Small spillage should be let to evaporate. Large spillage should be collected into an adsorbent for disposal at an authorized approved landfill. Section VII - Storage Store containers well closed in a well-ventilated area. Do not store in area exposed to sunlight. Keep separate from acids.
Section VIII - Personal Protection Information Ventilation : Good general ventilation should be sufficient for most conditions. Respiratory Protection : When airborne exposure guidelines and/or comfort levels may be exceeded, use an approved air-purifying respirator (if needed). Eye Contact : 3 For high potential exposure chemical goggles or full face screen are recommended because eye contact with this material may cause some pains or eyes irritate. For low and moderate potential exposure use safety glasses. Protective Clothing : For brief contact, no precautions other than clean body covering clothing should be needed. Use cotton gloves when prolonged or frequently repeated contact could occur. Section IX - Chemical & physical properties Formula (Baking Soda): NaHCO3. Mol. Weight : 84.01 Color : Green. Odor : Strong smell. Boiling point (oC) : 101.01 Freezing point (oC) : -7 Vapor pressure: Negligible Phase: Solution and aquanauts Flash point: Not flammable. Section X - Reactivity & Stability Stable and does not decomposes up to 250ºC. Materials to avoid: Light metals and strong oxidizing agents. Section XI - Toxicological Data The product has not been reported as toxic material. No carcinogenic activity. Does not affect sensitive aquatic population. Section XII - Ecologic environmental data. Sodium bicarbonate and yeast are friendly products in environment. Both do not impose to heavy burden to it’s survivals.
Section XIII: Disposal considerations Both ingredients of the product are not poisonous materials. In case of spillage one may dispose them to the municipal disposal unless authorities require a different waste treatment. 4 Section XIV: Transport regulations DOT No special requirements IMO Not found IYATA Not regulated Labeling:
According to self-classifications. Symbol: - Indication of danger (irritating material) Special risks: Mild irritant Safety advice: Do not swallow Avoid contact with eyes.
Product shipping regulation Sipping name : Risk group : Non hazardous Failure limits :
Section: XV other regulations \s and directives
Safety codes: R36 – Irritating to eyes.
Spillage [0], Chemical and Physical activity [0], Flammability [0].
5
Section XVI other general information
W A R R A N T Y
The information herein is based on the literature and experience
concerning with this subject, is given in good faith and to the best of our
knowledge but no warrant , express or implied , is made.
This material safety data sheet was issued on the 12 th September, 2004. REVISION #1 'on the 9th September, 2008.
I gave some damn good reasoning for MSDS meaning nothing. However, we go by RS. The weight given to certain sources is questionable . This product could easily be good or bad. What matters is that is that we can write an article with no worries about that. If you focus on the actual product then the history of use will (and should) take a lesser role as the reader sees it. There will definitely be a history section. "Propaganda" (take offence if you want, Nish, but several editors have said it) can take a back seat. How about you lay out some generally sourced info instead of playing defense, Ashtul? Cptnono ( talk) 07:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
The label of Skunk says "Do not swallow" and MSDS first aid warns for ingestion: "If swallowed give fluids, don’t induce vomiting, consult a physician who will decide on need and method for emptying the stomach or any other medical care", for eyes "Rinse with water for at least 15 min. If the pain continues, get medical consultation", for skin "Wash off with running water or shower. Wash contaminated clothing" and for inhalation: "If will effects occur, remove to fresh air. If not breathing give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen, call a physician or any available medical help. before reuse".
There are two reasons. It is citing a primary source, whereas we have a secondary source, and the latter are to be preferred over the former. And it looks like a machine translation. (c) This is an encyclopedia, not an advertising site for the firm. Nishidani ( talk) 15:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
MENAHEM KAHANA, 'ISRAEL-POLITICS-MILITARY-JUDAISM-ARREST-DEMO,' referred to Getty Images has a comment by the photographer Menahem Kahana below it, in a caption, and this is used to source the idea that it has been used multiple times (so far, with this, twice) against Haredi crowds. This is not an RS news source as far as I can see. The information is worth including. My problem is, editors are complaining of my use of video and photographic evidence re its use against Palestinians, from Mondoweiss and +972 magazine, while not raising objections to the additions from Menahem Kahana or News 0404, which deal with its use against Haredi. Cptono, I would appreciate it if could you look at this discrepancy. I dislike incongruency (personally I accept the Kahana and Yitzhak Weiss material, but it has arguably no better or less RS status than the sources I added, and which a majority want removed as non-RS). Nishidani ( talk) 18:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
'It was told to not wash off easily and linger on clothes for up to five years'.
This is hilarious in English, meaning that skunk was informed not to wash itself, but rather to linger on (in lingerie?) for years. I can't fix it today because of 1R, but it evidently should read.
'It is said not to be easy to wash off, and to linger in clothes for upwards of five years'. Nishidani ( talk) 18:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
To avoid edit warring let's try to note down and sort out some of the outstanding issues. I'd appreciate input, a list of suggestions of things that might be done to improve the page. By the way there is a New Zealand product called skunk apparently that the LA Times mentions as on sale to police forces. Nishidani ( talk) 20:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Worth keeping probably but removing from EL
Cptnono ( talk) 06:33, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
(copied from Talk:Gaza Strip#RS: double standards?)
- "... The most "comic" is Nishidani's reply - glibly (as usual) blaming those whom he doesn't like, in parallel, he added to the Skunk his favorite, but so controversial, Mondoweiss.
- However, his response from a man who allows himself such next false accusations and boorish remarks to his opponent as :
- isn't relevant at all, and should be of interest to administrators, if they ever will be found. :( -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 16:41, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- As I see, this discussion may be interested to Sean.hoyland who just now has reverted the Talk:Skunk (weapon) article to Nishidani's version :( -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 16:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- You are not constructively contributing to the building of articles, Igorp. Your talk page expositions are garbled, ill-focused, and difficult to reply to, and you frequently revert me, as do several pseudo-editors recycled from the past, without any talk page rationale or comprehensible edit-summary. This may not be purposive, but when repeated as a pattern, it figures as a controlled provocation, trying to elicit some impatience, which, in the case you cite, it did. That edit was totally unmotivated. If you want to edit wiki, learn collegiality. Nishidani ( talk) 16:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notification but no, it doesn't interest me I'm afraid. I don't make content edits, write articles or participate in article talk page discussions anymore. People who have no personal connection to the Israel-Palestine conflict are best placed to determine the RS status of the source in this context in my view. I'm just reverting an obvious sock. I believe youngsters might refer to it as "fucking someone's shit up". It's a far more productive way to contribute to ARBPIA given the state of affairs as far as I'm concerned. It's also my way of supporting Israel by nullifying the presence of people who make Israel supporters look bad so that editors don't have the same experience as me. For example, when I started editing Wikipedia I was opposed to BDS, but years of exposure to many of the people who come here to advocate for the State of Israel helped to make me a firm supporter of BDS. This is probably not a good thing. Anyway, I shall go back to my Paul Auster novel, the 7th Auster novel I've read in the last few weeks, thanks in part to all that extra time not spent dealing with ethno-nationalist activists on Wikipedia. Sean.hoyland - talk 17:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- @ Sean.hoyland: I's really sad for me to hear that some/ones/thing made you "a firm supporter of BDS" with such its deals as "Spain condemns cancellation of Jewish musician Matisyahu at reggae festival", etc. Not so sad is your awareness that "This is probably not a good thing" :) Regarding to your 'ethno-nationalist activists on Wikipedia' definition: I see it (my own activity as min) in another way: to reflect what is / was happened as closely as possible to reality - without clichés and false versions.
- Returning to a "Mondoweiss' case", let's continue in Talk:Skunk (weapon). -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 14:32, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
-- Igorp_lj ( talk) 14:56, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
I have made two changes. First, dropped the Mondoweiss source because there are two sources already. Secondly, removed "according to Ma'an" as unneeded. Ma'an is simply reporting testimony from witnesses. The JPost source also refers obliquely to "riot-dispersal means". There is little doubt that Skunk was used, see for instance the photos here, among other places. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 17:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to correct the URL to the first citation, " http://whoprofits.org/sites/default/files/weapons_report-8.pdf", which currently returns an incorrect web page, with the following correct URL: " https://whoprofits.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/old/weapons_report-8.pdf". Thanks Ikerus ( talk) 12:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Would it be possible to make the statement "We used it on a captive crowd consisting of CRPF personnel and general public." link to Central Reserve Police Force? Algotr ( talk) 13:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Wow, good thing this brilliant article is protected. When something is so perfect, any edit would be a disimprovement. What if some stupid editor decided that mentioning the story about India once is enough? Wouldn't that suck?
It says it is used against Palestinians when in fact it’s used against any violent demonstrations wether Palestinian or not. Change this immediately, remove “Palestinian”. I’m not trying to get political but I am trying to point out bias, propaganda and misleading statements. Jake pres ( talk) 02:28, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
It says it’s used for collective punishment, the source for this is a biased source that opposes Israel. Either bring a more trustable source or remove. Jake pres ( talk) 02:31, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Somebody interested in adding the Hebrew name - Bo'esh (בואש), too? 138.246.3.234 ( talk) 09:31, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can you add the Skunk attack by former IDF soldiers on Columbia University Students who were peacefully protesting the Genocide of Palestinians? It happened Jan 19th, 2024 2600:1017:B825:38D2:3580:32EB:2B99:7B3B ( talk) 20:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Here are five reliable sources on the alleged use of Skunk at Columbia:
-- Mox La Push ( talk) 03:55, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
In December 2017, Haaretz reported: Skunk is liable to cause physical harm, such as intense nausea, vomiting and skin rashes, in addition to any injury resulting from the powerful force of the spray. Examinations by police and army medical teams in the past also indicated that the excessive coughing caused by exposure can result in suffocation.
This section is sourced by a random Haaretz article that provides no actual evidence other than "examinations by police and army medical teams" which is meaningless without providing proof of this. I could find zero data to back up that sunk is deadly. Aj67876 ( talk) 04:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
The verifiability/clarity of parts of this section is currently [3] somewhat problematic.
The company sells a special soap – available to authorities but not the general public – that neutralises the smell of skunk water if officers are accidentally sprayed. It has been suggested that rubbing a surface contaminated with skunk with ketchup, similar to getting rid of a real skunk spray with tomato juice, and then washing it off, may diminish perception of the odor (due to the effects of olfactory fatigue [1]). [2] In 1993, [3] American chemist Paul Krebaum developed a compound that chemically neutralizes natural skunk spray by changing the odor-causing thiols into odorless acids. This compound can be prepared as a mixture of: 1 quart of 3% hydrogen peroxide, ¼ cup of baking soda, and 1-2 teaspoons of liquid dish soap. [1]
- ^ a b Vantassel SM, Hygnstrom SE, Ferraro DM (2011). "Removing Skunk Odor" (PDF). NebGuide (UNL Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources). G2100. University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Retrieved 21 January 2024.
- ^ "Who, What, Why: What is skunk water?". BBC News. September 11, 2015.
- ^ Forbes, JE (March 1995). "The tip of the month" (PDF). The Probe (152). Hopland, CA: National Animal Damage Control Association: 2.
86.180.70.36 ( talk) 12:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
In the opening paragraph we have "The liquid's strong odor is marketed as an improvement over other crowd control weapons (CCWs) such as rubber bullets and tear gas used by the IDF against Palestinian protestors. The IDF is criticized for its tactics during deployment, including common use against people, businesses, and neighborhoods not involved in protests as a form of collective punishment."
I can't see the need for anything after"(CCWs)". Can en editor step in? 92.62.1.33 ( talk) 22:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)