The result was: promoted by —
Amakuru (
talk) 13:30, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
At the same time, the Working Definition has had its share of critics, as should be expected of any serious intergovernmental effort to address this difficult subject. In 2011, the United Kingdom's University and College Union (UCU), a trade union of English university professors, considered a motion to disassociate itself from the EUMC definition... based on a belief that it "confuses criticism of Israeli government policy and actions with genuine anti-Semitism"... This triggered a lively controversy that engulfed not only the English academic and Jewish communities, but also Jewish, human rights, and higher education groups throughout Europe and Worldwide. In the United States, the meaning and application of the Working Definition have been contested even among those who support it. In 2011, Kenneth Stern, who was then the top anti-Semitism expert at the American Jewish Committee, drew intense criticism when he... argued that the Working Definition was being invoked by complainants in federal civil rights cases before the United States Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to censor speech that is critical of Israel.
Created by Onceinawhile ( talk). Self-nominated at 11:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
Created 8 August from redirect. Other creator not mentioned in the nom:
Jonney2000. If/when this is promoted, I recommend page protection as this is a controversial topic. I cannot find NPOV in the article, though.
Catrìona (
talk) 16:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
"its inclusion of examples of criticism of Israel?"- as this is very much in dispute. Some people who object to the definition, including those who engage in speech considered antisemtic by the definition have said that it "confuses criticism of Israeli government policy and actions with genuine anti-Semitism" (note the quotation in the cited source). Others consider comparisons to the Nazis as antisemitic. The cited source itself (which was cherrypicked sentence by sentence by the nominator here - the quotation next to the hook reads nothing like the actual text in pages 20-21 (also miscited) - as individual sentences were picked out with no context) says right after the UCU quote (and this in its own voice - not quoting) -
"The UCU motion itself was widely criticized, and some accused the union of attempting to extricate itself from accusations of anti-Semitism by changing the definition of the term". At the very least,
"inclusion of examples of criticism of Israelneeds to be attributed to those who object to the definition - and a neutral presentation would state that said Nazi comparisons are considered to be antisemitic by others. Icewhiz ( talk) 07:24, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Putting this icon so that this can remain at the pending hooks page rather than approved hooks page, while the hook wording is sorted out. @
Onceinawhile: Do you have an idea on how to respond to Icewhiz's concerns?
Narutolovehinata5
t
c
csd
new 08:32, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
No, we are done here, per
User:The C of E also. I have looked over the material and the discussion here five times now, and Icewhiz's point is simply not valid. Is there controversy over the definition? Sure, there is some, and it's verified by a reliable source. Is the controversy over "criticism of Israel"? Yes it is. Is it valid criticism, or is it invalid because it comes from a group or out of a university system that is accused of antisemitism, one way or another, in possibly varying degrees of validity? Not our concern. Even if it were fringe, it's well-verified. No, it is time to send this on its way: it's been here long enough.
Drmies (
talk) 03:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
@
Onceinawhile: @
Drmies: sorry to be a pain, but
User:The Rambling Man has spotted bare URLs and issues with the references not being accurate. See
[4]. I have therefore pulled this from the queue for the time being, so the issues can be resolved. The hook can then be re-promoted. Thanks —
Amakuru (
talk) 22:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by —
Amakuru (
talk) 13:30, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
At the same time, the Working Definition has had its share of critics, as should be expected of any serious intergovernmental effort to address this difficult subject. In 2011, the United Kingdom's University and College Union (UCU), a trade union of English university professors, considered a motion to disassociate itself from the EUMC definition... based on a belief that it "confuses criticism of Israeli government policy and actions with genuine anti-Semitism"... This triggered a lively controversy that engulfed not only the English academic and Jewish communities, but also Jewish, human rights, and higher education groups throughout Europe and Worldwide. In the United States, the meaning and application of the Working Definition have been contested even among those who support it. In 2011, Kenneth Stern, who was then the top anti-Semitism expert at the American Jewish Committee, drew intense criticism when he... argued that the Working Definition was being invoked by complainants in federal civil rights cases before the United States Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to censor speech that is critical of Israel.
Created by Onceinawhile ( talk). Self-nominated at 11:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
Created 8 August from redirect. Other creator not mentioned in the nom:
Jonney2000. If/when this is promoted, I recommend page protection as this is a controversial topic. I cannot find NPOV in the article, though.
Catrìona (
talk) 16:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
"its inclusion of examples of criticism of Israel?"- as this is very much in dispute. Some people who object to the definition, including those who engage in speech considered antisemtic by the definition have said that it "confuses criticism of Israeli government policy and actions with genuine anti-Semitism" (note the quotation in the cited source). Others consider comparisons to the Nazis as antisemitic. The cited source itself (which was cherrypicked sentence by sentence by the nominator here - the quotation next to the hook reads nothing like the actual text in pages 20-21 (also miscited) - as individual sentences were picked out with no context) says right after the UCU quote (and this in its own voice - not quoting) -
"The UCU motion itself was widely criticized, and some accused the union of attempting to extricate itself from accusations of anti-Semitism by changing the definition of the term". At the very least,
"inclusion of examples of criticism of Israelneeds to be attributed to those who object to the definition - and a neutral presentation would state that said Nazi comparisons are considered to be antisemitic by others. Icewhiz ( talk) 07:24, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Putting this icon so that this can remain at the pending hooks page rather than approved hooks page, while the hook wording is sorted out. @
Onceinawhile: Do you have an idea on how to respond to Icewhiz's concerns?
Narutolovehinata5
t
c
csd
new 08:32, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
No, we are done here, per
User:The C of E also. I have looked over the material and the discussion here five times now, and Icewhiz's point is simply not valid. Is there controversy over the definition? Sure, there is some, and it's verified by a reliable source. Is the controversy over "criticism of Israel"? Yes it is. Is it valid criticism, or is it invalid because it comes from a group or out of a university system that is accused of antisemitism, one way or another, in possibly varying degrees of validity? Not our concern. Even if it were fringe, it's well-verified. No, it is time to send this on its way: it's been here long enough.
Drmies (
talk) 03:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
@
Onceinawhile: @
Drmies: sorry to be a pain, but
User:The Rambling Man has spotted bare URLs and issues with the references not being accurate. See
[4]. I have therefore pulled this from the queue for the time being, so the issues can be resolved. The hook can then be re-promoted. Thanks —
Amakuru (
talk) 22:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)