This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
AIPAC article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
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 subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 18 December 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from American Israel Public Affairs Committee to AIPAC. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
OOPS! Further research reveals that AIPAC later in April endorsed 109 Republican election deniers, which contradicts what I said below. Perhaps what is needed for the article is this footnote link at the end of the quoted sentence: https://www.jta.org/2022/04/21/politics/aipacs-new-pac-is-now-the-countrys-biggest-pro-israel-pac-and-endorses-3-4-of-republicans-who-embraced-election-falsehoods . It describes the original and the later endorsement. Perhaps the sentence could also be changed in this way: "While having endorsed later in April over 100 Republican members of Congress..." ___________ I'm leaving my original post, for those who want more context and want to double-check my conclusion: [Original Talk post] The endorsement apparently was for 37 Republican election deniers, not over a hundred. So the sentence beginning "While having endorsed over 100 Republican members of Congress who had voted against certifying Joe Biden's election" is mistaken. Apparently 120 members of Congress of BOTH parties were endorsed, based on various pro-Israel stances, which included the 37 Republican election deniers.
Here is the complete list: https://www.timesofisrael.com/aipac-slammed-for-endorsing-republicans-who-refused-to-certify-bidens-election/amp/
These articles are also informative: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/23/aipac-pro-israel-group-backs-insurrectionist-republicans
https://theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/18/pro-israel-lobby-group-aipac-midterms-election-deniers-and-extremist-republicans Deardavid7 ( talk) 14:53, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 21:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
American Israel Public Affairs Committee → AIPAC – The organization is known primarily as "AIPAC". Non-ambiguous common name. Schierbecker ( talk) 03:29, 18 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Mattdaviesfsic ( talk) 22:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The sentence Cuellar called
Amnesty International "antisemitic" after the release of its report accusing Israel of the crime of apartheid, in agreement with the
Human Right Watch and other Israeli and international human rights groups
in section
§ United Democracy Project spending is confusingly phrased. When I initially read it I interpreted it as meaning that the
HRW and other rights groups agreed with Cuellar's accusation of antisemitism, instead of the factual reality of them agreeing with Amnesty's accusation of genocide. Thus, the sentence should be rephrased. (I would submit a proper edit request, but I don't quite have enough time to do that properly so I am leaving this as message instead for other editors to take up the task, and/or a a note to self to remind me) –
99.146.242.37 (
talk) 17:50, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
"AIPAC describes itself as a bipartisan organization, and the bills for which it lobbies in Congress are always jointly sponsored by both a Democrat and Republican."
The way this is written implies that the organization is factually bipartisan and does not clarify that the second statement is a claim by AIPAC rather than an observed fact. The phrasing "the bills [...] are always jointly sponsored" is simply a falsehood. A counterclaim from an authentic source should also be added to state how aligned the organization truly is between Democrats and Republicans.
Finally, the source used (Times of Israel) could be argued to be biased or have conflict of interest to say AIPAC is bipartisan. A reliable American or international source would be needed for this issue. I.Elgamal ( talk) 13:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
AIPAC article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
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 subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 18 December 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from American Israel Public Affairs Committee to AIPAC. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
OOPS! Further research reveals that AIPAC later in April endorsed 109 Republican election deniers, which contradicts what I said below. Perhaps what is needed for the article is this footnote link at the end of the quoted sentence: https://www.jta.org/2022/04/21/politics/aipacs-new-pac-is-now-the-countrys-biggest-pro-israel-pac-and-endorses-3-4-of-republicans-who-embraced-election-falsehoods . It describes the original and the later endorsement. Perhaps the sentence could also be changed in this way: "While having endorsed later in April over 100 Republican members of Congress..." ___________ I'm leaving my original post, for those who want more context and want to double-check my conclusion: [Original Talk post] The endorsement apparently was for 37 Republican election deniers, not over a hundred. So the sentence beginning "While having endorsed over 100 Republican members of Congress who had voted against certifying Joe Biden's election" is mistaken. Apparently 120 members of Congress of BOTH parties were endorsed, based on various pro-Israel stances, which included the 37 Republican election deniers.
Here is the complete list: https://www.timesofisrael.com/aipac-slammed-for-endorsing-republicans-who-refused-to-certify-bidens-election/amp/
These articles are also informative: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/23/aipac-pro-israel-group-backs-insurrectionist-republicans
https://theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/18/pro-israel-lobby-group-aipac-midterms-election-deniers-and-extremist-republicans Deardavid7 ( talk) 14:53, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 21:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
American Israel Public Affairs Committee → AIPAC – The organization is known primarily as "AIPAC". Non-ambiguous common name. Schierbecker ( talk) 03:29, 18 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Mattdaviesfsic ( talk) 22:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The sentence Cuellar called
Amnesty International "antisemitic" after the release of its report accusing Israel of the crime of apartheid, in agreement with the
Human Right Watch and other Israeli and international human rights groups
in section
§ United Democracy Project spending is confusingly phrased. When I initially read it I interpreted it as meaning that the
HRW and other rights groups agreed with Cuellar's accusation of antisemitism, instead of the factual reality of them agreeing with Amnesty's accusation of genocide. Thus, the sentence should be rephrased. (I would submit a proper edit request, but I don't quite have enough time to do that properly so I am leaving this as message instead for other editors to take up the task, and/or a a note to self to remind me) –
99.146.242.37 (
talk) 17:50, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
"AIPAC describes itself as a bipartisan organization, and the bills for which it lobbies in Congress are always jointly sponsored by both a Democrat and Republican."
The way this is written implies that the organization is factually bipartisan and does not clarify that the second statement is a claim by AIPAC rather than an observed fact. The phrasing "the bills [...] are always jointly sponsored" is simply a falsehood. A counterclaim from an authentic source should also be added to state how aligned the organization truly is between Democrats and Republicans.
Finally, the source used (Times of Israel) could be argued to be biased or have conflict of interest to say AIPAC is bipartisan. A reliable American or international source would be needed for this issue. I.Elgamal ( talk) 13:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)