Talk:Bezalel Smotrich

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

changing homophobia --> Anti LGBT position[edit]

Hi, I don't think that changing homophobia Anti LGBT position seems better. His words are clearly printed and he calls himself a homophob. So, I'd like to request and change the title of the controversy back. Cheers Arthistorian1977 (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Arthistorian1977: I disagree. He stated he has no problem with what people do in their homes. Settleman (talk) 13:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We're not going to discuss his views. But in terminology POV, Anti LGBT is being homophobic, especially since he declares it by himself. This is the same as replace "Antisemitic" to "Anti Jewish". Homophobic controversy is just the proper word here. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 17:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Arthistorian1977: A religious person like Smotrich can be anti LGBT but not homophob. Like I said, he stated he has no problem with what people do in their homes. His response was blown out of propotions. This is at least my opinion. Settleman (talk) 17:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We are talking terminology, not his views, which are clearly stated by himself here [1]. He calls himself a homophobe. And being Anti LGBT is being homophobic. So, I think you're edit is not in place and request your consensus you revert it. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Arthistorian1977: Here are two articles in Hebrew [2],[3] which say he took back his comment (I will add it to the article later). If you believe 'Anti LGBT is being homophob', I don't see why would you care but personally I think the fact his opinion is based on religion doesn't make him homophob else, most religious people would be considered homophobs. Feel free to move this to the talk page or I can do it later. I also appreciate you reaching out for consensus. Seem to be rare quality around here. Settleman (talk) 18:50, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that anti-LGBT position is probably a better section title (it effectively says the same thing anyway). By the way Settleman, I am rather disturbed to see that you accused me of being a pro-Israel editor here. Although I now occasionally attempt to fight the tide of pro-Palestinian editors when their nonsense appears on my watchlist, I spent my first few years on Wikipedia battling against pro-Israel trolls (to the extent that several Israeli editors attempted to stop me becoming an admin). Please remove your accusation. Number 57 09:27, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Number 57 Done. I'm undeniably pro-Israel but add material for both sides as I come across it. I'll appreciate it if you join the arbitration case. I also believe there is nothing wrong with being anti-Israel but utilizing Wikipedia for the fight is wrong. Settleman (talk) 09:33, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Number 57 Settleman Arthistorian1977
Being opposed to LGBT philosophy or movement doesn't make somebody an "homophobe". Exactly as defending Israel policies doesn't make somebody a racist or being opposed to Judaism doesn't make somebody an "antisemite".
NB: Settleman, from recently you have started adding material from both sides but you don't comply with NPoV yet anyway. You have some ideas of what is the pov of opponents to some Israeli policies but when you write an article on such a topic, it is not enough to google for some articles about what they say. You have to understand their arguments as well as you understand those that you share/listen day-to-day and put all of them in article in order that everybody understand them. You also have to introduce their arguments "fairly" , fully and a positive way even if critics should come just after (and the answers to these critics if any).
The big issue [for you] will be that on the statistical point of view, you should face 50% of time arguments from the other side partly stronger than the ones you believe in. How will you manage this if your are pro-Israel and revendicate this or the right to be so on wp ?
As a good start : you could start by trying to understand the Muslim and the Palestinian point of view regarding al-Haram al-Sharif / Temple Mount and introducing this on the article your recently created.
Pluto2012 (talk) 06:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Pluto2012: I will take your advise as soon as you stop making edits like this one which are not only OR but has nothing to do with the source. Lets make sure the information is valid before worrying about WP:WEIGHT.
Had I not cared about NPoV the article would have focus on the daily violence those women use on mopst visitors regardless of being 'settlers' or 'extremists'. Basically everybody. But this isn't the place. I welcome you to hound me to that one. Settleman (talk) 19:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See Murabitat's talk page. Pluto2012 (talk) 05:23, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removed both parts that used ref 18.[edit]

Both had to be removed due to ref 18 being an opinion paper from the the guardian. Even if the claims could be proved, an opinion paper is not a valid source for a Wikipedia article, and just removing the source wouldn't be enough, since then they would just be unclaimed statements.17:58, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

You should sign your comments. Are you compliant with ARBPIA rules? Editors who haven't done the required number of 500 edits, cannot edit articles that come under the Israeli/Palestinian topic range.Nishidani (talk) 20:13, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't aware, also, meant to sign the comment. Though, this article isn't about the conflict it is about an Israeli politician, if admins thought this came under the Israeli/Palestinian topic range, wouldn't they lock the page? Finally, my point was fair, it did violate Wikipedia rules to use a opinion source twice to make claims. User:ShimonChai 07:20, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is about an Israeli politician who has distinguished himself publicly by calling for the eviction of Palestinians from their land, where he resides illegally on land not even Israel claims under its 'state land' law, and whose political projects consists of, among many other things, continuing efforts to 'abort' a Palestinian state, and absorb all of the land internationally regarded as Palestinian into a Greater Israel. It is self-evidential that this comes under the Israeli- Palestinian conflict range covered by Arbitration, and I have duly placed the notification on the talk page, above.Nishidani (talk) 07:37, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So this makes it okay for you to still implement opinion sources? Also, it seems like you are trying to prevent people from make sure Wikipedia remains NPOV, and free from opinion. ShimonChai (talk) 07:43, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

She was not cited for her opinions, but for the facts she cited. An article, well documented, as any examination of its sourcing would show, which a newspaper classifies under its opinion columns, should not be removed with its material on sight. This only becomes 'iffy' if the material cited is speculative or personal opinionizing. You took out factual statements, easily verifiable as such. In such cases, removal harms the factual record, and, if one dislikes the source, one should in conscience check around and see if the material is controversial. If it isn't, then removing the article looks like a pretext to erase facts that are uncomfortable. One should be constructive here. Googling to verify only takes a few seconds, while reverting without checking damages the quality of articles. You appear to accept that what you excised was on the public record. Why didn't you add the kind of sources I found within a few seconds. Had I, in this case (and this happens every day for many articles editors may not bookmark) not had this article bookmarked, those facts would have dropped off the article, with full awareness by the removalist editor that they are true to the public record. Such an approach damages the aim for comprehensive coverage the encyclopedia aspires to.Nishidani (talk) 07:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bezalel Smotrich. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:33, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:"Infobox member of the Knesset"[edit]

Template:Infobox member of the Knesset has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox officeholder. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 17:28, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry[edit]

The article currently mentions his Ukrainian Jewish ancestry tracing to the town of Smotrych. In this speech, Smotrich mentions some more details on his family from Europe and also says that his grandfather Shimon was a 13th generation native of Jerusalem. IMO this info, especially the fact that he is of centuries-long Old Yishuv descent, is relevant and should be included. Problem is I so far haven't been able to find a source. This video is clearly him speaking but I don't know if a YouTube video from a non-official account cuts it, especially since the Hebrew title of the video is mocking Smotrich's shaky English. Anyone have any input? If someone can find a source on his grandfather it would be really helpful.--RM (Be my friend) 23:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'Far right????' Meretz is not considered far left???[edit]

I'm really confused as to why Smotrich is labeled far right but the Meretz party leader Zehava Galon is not labelled far left. I don't think there is any difference between them in regards to their positions on the political spectrum 185.182.71.29 (talk) 00:58, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a discussion for the Zehava Galon page. Smotrich is also termed 'extreme-right'. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a highly biased article that doesn't at all read like an encyclopedia.[edit]

As a staunch ideological opponent of Smotrich, I have to not that this is not a good and informative article.

This article, in its near entirety, reads like the Controversies section featured on most politician articles. The very introduction of the article features details that are trivial in their significance to Smotrich's overall history, such as his homophobic comment on pride parades ("worse than bestiality"'), his comment on the Nakba ("Ben Gurion should've finished the job") and the legality of Kedumim. All of these demonstrate important aspects of his far-right views, but the use of highly specific examples here is not similar to anything I've seen on a politician's article.

It's very clearly done to immediately present Smotrich in a negative light to the reader rather than to inform them about the basic facts that should be featured in an article introduction. Imagine if the introduction section of Donald Trump's article would feature his "grab them by the pussy" quote, or Jair Bolsonaro's introduction feature his "30,000" quote instead of laying out the key points of their history. Such details belong in a Controversies or Views section within the article, not in the introduction.

Subsequentially, most of the article goes on to detail exclusively points that demonstrate Smortich's far-right views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and social matters rather than listing the major events and legislation concerning him. Sure, the controversial aspects of Smotrich (and there are plenty) deserve a fair share of the article, but they shouldn't be prioritized above the most basic historical facts concerning him: his political campaigns and lists he participated in, the massive legislations he orchestrated in the different ministries, etc. The intention of the article be, first and foremost, to inform the reader about the basic facts rather than stick to trivial details. Zohariko1234 (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, edit in, using reliable mainstream newspaper sources, Smotrich's major events and legislation. As long as you have these quality sources, you, like anyone else, can improve coverage of his political career. By all means, go ahead.Nishidani (talk) 21:06, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you, and for now I've added the POV template. Synotia (moan) 07:52, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Smotrich doctrine[edit]

I'd never heard of this guy and I don't want to get sucked into the wikidrama rabbit hole that comes from editing this type of article, but I recently came across this which claims that Smotrich's proposals have public support in Israel and are in fact being implemented in the current Israel-Hamas war. I leave it to the regulars whether it should be included in the wiki article. 2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:6375 (talk) 21:04, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Birthplace in infobox[edit]

I reverted the addition of "Israeli occupied" to his birthplace in the infobox, as it seems unnecessary (and being added to make a point). I am not aware that this is done for other people born in occupied territory in the region (for example, Mohammed Dahlan's birthplace is listed as "Gaza Strip", not "Egyptian-occupied Gaza Strip" (which would be equally unnecessary/pointy). Number 57 13:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57: Please revert yourself per WP person infobox parameters: "Place of birth: city, administrative region, country." Makeandtoss (talk) 14:34, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no country in this case. His birth was pre-annexation, so technically the country was Syria, but that would clearly be nonsensical to include. The current version is the most sensible solution IMO. Number 57 14:39, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Number: That just proves my point...? During Israeli occupation, which you have removed. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Occupation isn't a country though, hence simply listing "Golan Heights" as the birthplace. Would you add "Egyptian-occupied" to Dahlan's infobox? You don't have to ping me btw, as I have this page on my watchlist. Number 57 15:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would support adding whatever occupation to whatever article. Very important to note that when he was born, Golan Heights was born under Israeli occupation, otherwise it would insinuate that it is somehow part of Israel, or that Smotrich is Syrian; neither is true. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The whole point of having it as "Golan Heights" (as it has been since the article was created in 2015) is to avoid any insinuations as to ownership of the area. Number 57 16:32, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Golan Heights belongs to Syria regardless of the illegal occupation and annexation, as a matter of fact of international law. I hope you are not bringing your personal opinions and preferences into this matter. Makeandtoss (talk) 17:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is a factual matter; de jure the area is Syrian, but de facto it has not been since 1967, so it would be somewhat absurd to say he was born in Syria. However, the area is not Israel (and was not even according to Israeli law in 1980), hence simply listing his birthplace as "Golan Heights". The fact that it is occupied by Israel at the time is clearly stated in the prose of the article, but I don't think it is appropriate to also detail this in the infobox.
While it's quite amusing to see the occasional accusation as to what my personal opinions on Israel/Palestine may or may not be (and which are almost always wrong), I would suggest you refrain from making insinuations and stick to the matter at hand. Number 57 17:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What you said is crystal clear: "avoid any insinuations as to ownership of the area"; as if, de jure speaking, the area is under dispute, which is completely factually false according to international law and rulings and RS that states unequivocally that the territory is Syrian and occupied by Israel. Therefore, the only remaining possible explanation that this is a personal opinion/preference.
Your main counterargument - how we don't have the occupation status in Dahlan's article - has been responded to already; you can add the occupation status of Gaza there. So please, after we have gotten over that counterargument, stick to the matter at hand yourself and kindly self-revert. Makeandtoss (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I won't be reverting as I don't believe it should be listed. I will start an RfC though. Number 57 18:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
smotrich is criminel. terroriste. free free palestine 2A01:E0A:3:C500:A48D:E877:6160:CE35 (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment[edit]

How should Smotrich's birthplace be listed in the infobox?

  1. Haspin, Golan Heights
  2. Haspin, Israeli-occupied Golan Heights

Number 57 18:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Option 1 It does not seem necessary to note the occupation in the infobox, where brevity is key. The occupation is noted in the prose. Number 57 18:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What a complete disregard for Wikipedia's guidelines and processes. Please respect editors' time here by reading and following the steps outlined on WP:RFCBEFORE. Your main counterargument has been responded to; despite this, you have continued to insist on removing this from the infobox, which is borderline disruptive editing: WP:ICANTHEARYOU. Makeandtoss (talk) 18:45, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the point in continuing to go round in circles with an editor who has resorted to making accusations about personal preferences or is making edits like this (which looks like an attempt to suggest I am changing the status quo, when you were the one in breach of WP:BRD here by reinstating a reverted edit). Number 57 19:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you have reverted my edit - the status quo - and used a counterargument that was responded to. After your counterargument was refuted, you opened an RFC against WP:RFCBEFORE. And even after RFCBEFORE guideline has been pointed out to you, you have not removed it, marking the second instance of WP:ICANTHEARYOU, which is again borderline disruptive editing. It is not me who is going in circles. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:09, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The status quo was the position before your edit, as it had been since 2015. Regarding the supposed refutation of my point, I didn't see anything to refute my belief that it is unnecessary (I don't believe it is necessary for Dahlan's infobox either). And as for disruptive editing, I'm pretty sure removing an RfC template is the only example of it on this page. I hope you at least have the decency to accept Nemov's opinion as a WP:3O. Number 57 17:09, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option 1 This is the WP:COMMONNAME of the location. The occupation can be mentioned in the body if it's relevant to the biography. Nemov (talk) 17:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add Photo ... Smotrich a terror suspect, after 2006 arrest by Shin Bet[edit]

Suggested Edit ... Add Photo

https://i0.wp.com/www.richardsilverstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/smotrich-sharper.jpg?ssl=1

Smotrich, now finance minister; but here a terror suspect, after 2006 arrest by Shin Bet for plotting attack

https://www.richardsilverstein.com/2024/02/06/us-treasury-sanctions-settlers-ngos-facilitating-terrorism/ 2601:444:300:B070:3953:C3B8:2CE3:57C3 (talk) 15:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 33 and 38[edit]

As Mondoweiss should not be used for BLP, I would like to remove it and cited content (for the latter). Is someone opposed? FortunateSons (talk) 09:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bezalel_Smotrich&oldid=1218878551"