Talk:Media coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:47, 31 December 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Media coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Media coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Media coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict at the Reference desk.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Middle East B‑class

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

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Media B‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mackay Radio
Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Palestine B‑class Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal 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
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Israel B‑class High‑importance

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

B

This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Project Israel To Do:

edit
history
watch
purge

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles.
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page.
Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration.
Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005
Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel.
Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah
See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia.
Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data.
Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes.
Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention.
Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel.
NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries
Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel.
Stubs : See Israel stubs.
Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People
Other :
- Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary.

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:

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

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.

Further information

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.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Bias

This article seems to contain a lot of sources from the Palestinian side of the issue, while the Israeli issue isn’t covered in much detail. Zaffrei (talk)

CAMERA EDUCATION INSTITUTE

While CAMERA states that its aim is: "Fighting Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias in Education", there is a danger that its' output could be considered as Pro-Israel Bias. Given this, might not CAMERA be highlighted as a one-sided lobby group? (Updated) -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.136 (talk) 08:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a media organization, and its employees are not journalists. It's a watchdog and advocacy group, which is a rather different thing. AnonMoos (talk) 15:25, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Honestreporting

This article has 17 citations to Honestreporting, which is ridiculous overciting of a highly partisan activist organization. Zero^talk 03:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

working on it, same for CAMERA. nableezy - 21:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested edit(s)

The word desemanticization should link to Wiktionary, and not to Wikipedia's "Semantics" (which does not include the word). desemanticization IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 06:13, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cannot agree more. Though it's already done at the moment. Colaheed777 (talk) 10:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

garbage sources

I cleared out some of the unreliable sources that have bloated this article, more work needed. nableezy - 21:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Um, the Weekly Standard is reliable but despite the claims by Alaexis that was a commentary piece by Ariel Cohen of The Heritage Foundation, who was Senior Research Fellow in Russian and Eurasian Studies and International Energy Policy at The Heritage Foundation. Not any expertise in the Arab-Israeli conflict or Jenin or media. So it was not a reliable source. Alaexis, why did you return CAMERA and Honest Reporting as well? nableezy - 21:14, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why is CAMERA an unreliable source? They are biased for sure but it doesn't make them unreliable. Alaexis_¿question? 08:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because they have a documented history of underhanded and dishonest reporting and tactics? Why is it a reliable source? Since you have failed to answer any of my questions, and instead chose to turn the burden of demonstrating reliability to me to demonstrate unreliability I am going to again remove these garbage sources. nableezy - 21:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, somebody already did. Ill continue looking to improve this article through removing the crap that it is filled with. nableezy - 21:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So is it your personal opinion that "they have a documented history of underhanded and dishonest reporting and tactics"? Also, I don't see who did "it." Alaexis_¿question? 21:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zero0000 reverted your blanket revert. I’m not going to keep playing this game with you where you bring some garbage website with no qualifications and then say oh why’s it not a reliable source. What in WP:RS does CAMERA or Honest Repoeting qualify for? They aren’t a news organization, they aren’t scholarship, they aren’t a news aggregator. What about them qualifies as a reliable source. I don’t plan to play along with this game anymore though, sorry. Not every bullshit organization with a .com or .org is a reliable source. nableezy - 02:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CAMERA and Honest Reporting are not reliable sources that just happen to be biased. They are organisations that exist solely for the purpose of pro-Israel propaganda. Their claims might in some cases be citable with attribution when they themselves are involved in a controversy, but as sources of fact or expert opinion they are well below the bar. Zero^talk 02:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I only see your personal opinions here and IDONTLIKEIT is not a valid reason for removing content.

WP:RS does not contain an exhaustive list of all possible types of allowed sources (the section is called Some types of sources). If these sources are so bad then you should have no difficulties finding confirmations. Alaexis_¿question? 09:30, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but exclusion of material on the basis of the source being unreliable is entirely different from excluding it on the basis of not liking it. As for opinions, why is your opinion that they are reliable superior to my opinion that they are not reliable? There is no principle of reliable-until-proven-otherwise. There is a principle of ONUS, though, giving you the obligation to obtain consensus for this disputed material. Zero^talk 09:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And I only see your personal opinion that whatever website you can find on google is a reliable source. These arent, and you are free to ask RSN for their opinion if you like. nableezy - 20:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New related page

Wikipedia coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict

---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then I suggest moving the whole Wikipedia section there. Opinions? Colaheed777 (talk) 10:11, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CAMERA again

The matter of CAMERA has been discussed above, and Palestine Media Watch is much the same. It is about time that people who want to include these disputed unreliable sources in the article get the consensus that ONUS requires them to get. As well as being unusable for factual information, the fact that they are pure propaganda organisations with no other purpose means that it is inappropriate to cite their opinions either. For similar reasons, Electronic Intifada is not cited all over the place though it easily could be. CAMERA and Electronic Intifada are cited together in one section when the story involves them according to a reliable source. Zero^talk 09:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Zero0000: Looking through WP:RSN, I'm not seeing any consensus that CAMERA is unreliable - I note that in comparison, there is a consensus to deprecate Electronic Intifada. If there is something I have missed, can you link it? BilledMammal (talk) 09:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to discuss it here to establish consensus. Do you have sources that confirm that they are "pure propaganda organisations"? As you surely know, biased sources can be reliable. Alaexis_¿question? 09:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 71: / Line 71: @@
 The matter of CAMERA has been discussed above, and Palestine Media Watch is much the same. It is about time that people who want to include these disputed unreliable sources in the article get the consensus that ONUS requires them to get. As well as being unusable for factual information, the fact that they are pure propaganda organisations with no other purpose means that it is inappropriate to cite their opinions either. For similar reasons, Electronic Intifada is not cited all over the place though it easily could be.  CAMERA and Electronic Intifada are cited together in one section when the story involves them according to a reliable source. [[User:Zero0000|Zero]]<sup><small>[[User_talk:Zero0000|talk]]</small></sup> 09:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 :{{ping|Zero0000}} Looking through [[WP:RSN]], I'm not seeing any consensus that CAMERA is unreliable - I note that in comparison, there is a consensus to deprecate Electronic Intifada. If there is something I have missed, can you link it? [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 09:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
+:Happy to discuss it here to establish consensus. Do you have sources that confirm that they are "pure propaganda organisations"? As you surely know, biased sources [[WP:BIAS|can be reliable]]. [[User:Alaexis|Alaexis]]<sub>[[User_talk:Alaexis|¿question?]]</sub> 09:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)