Talk:Israel and apartheid

message: Why you have deleted my edit? You have provided the explanation: "In article body, controversial, inappropriate for the lead".
This is already mentioned in the article: In December 2019, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination announced commencing a review of the Palestinian complaint that Israel's policies in the West Bank amount to apartheid. Soon afterwards, two Israeli human rights NGOs, Yesh Din (July 2020), and B'Tselem (January 2021) issued separate reports that concluded, in the latter's words, that "the bar for labeling the Israeli regime as apartheid has been met." In April 2021, Human Rights Watch became the first major international human rights body to say Israel had crossed the threshold. It accused Israel of apartheid, and called for prosecution of Israeli officials under international law, calling for an International Criminal Court investigation. Amnesty International issued a report with similar findings on 1 February 2022.
So, my edit: "In 2017, a report by the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia concluded that Israel is "guilty of the crime of apartheid"." is not starting some new topic but provides additional information for what it is already said.
Keeping in mind this, I don't see how providing information from the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia is "controversial" and why it is "inappropriate for the lead" when there are already information in the article about international and Israeli organizations claiming that Israel is an apartheid state (Zdravko mk (talk) 17:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As you can see from the article, the 2017 report is covered in the article and that it was also not accepted officially by the UN. Therefore it is not appropriate to include a summary in the lead that says only "In 2017, a report by the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia concluded that Israel is "guilty of the crime of apartheid". The other reports deal with the situation adequately without the need for this particular report (in the lead). Selfstudier (talk) 17:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: Lede is focused more on the issue of "debates" which doesn't really summarize the body that focuses on the details of apartheid system. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The usual problem, for now, it is more about the accusation/denial than the actual facts, depressing but true. Selfstudier (talk) 12:41, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: But does that really reflect the body, as a lede should do? Makeandtoss (talk) 09:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede problem 

message: Should the lead include or remove the wikilink to Weaponization of antisemitism in the line ? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC: Wikilink to [[Weaponization of antisemitism]] 

message: * Remove. If the link is included, we'll be making a wikivoice claim that when Israel labels the apartheid charges antisemitic, it is engaging in weaponization of antisemitism. This claim is unmentioned in the body of the article. Two sources were added (to the lead only) to support the claim:  I don't think this body of sourcing is strong enough to support a wikivoice claim. If we determine that it is, I would rather be clear about the claim and not make it via an eggy link, and I'd rather see it mentioned in the body and then summarized in the lead. If we decide attribution is needed, I think that's fine, as long as the additional wordage necessary for attribution doesn't overweight this aspect of the subject. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey (Wikilink RfC) 

message: The link was first added on 7 April 2024 (diff), followed by many back-and-forth reverts and the above discussion. Pinging editors involved in the editing or discussion:  Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion (Wikilink RfC) 

message: This is not true. Israel currently has a law against miscegenation. It is illegal in Israel for a Jewish person to marry and Arab. Interreligious marriage within Israel is strictly forbidden by law. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2018/7/26/israels-nation-state-law-parallels-the-nazi-nuremberg-laws/ TerraTorment (talk) 00:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Ill look for better sourcing on this, but thank you. nableezy -  08:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Marriage in Israel Selfstudier (talk) 09:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

text: miscegenation are laws based on race? Afaics (WP is not a source), the Israeli laws are based on religion? Selfstudier (talk) 09:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  They are based on nominal religion. Being an atheist isn't enough to exclude someone from the rule about their nominal religion. I'm not sure about converts to a different religion. On the other hand, Israel recognises other marriages if they are performed overseas (but such people can have trouble if they seek to divorce). The answer to the title question depends on the definitions. Zerotalk 11:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

text: As far as I know, thats accurate. So the article saying that there is no law against it is correct. FortunateSons (talk) 07:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

text: By some definitions it can also be based on ethnicity. In Israel, religion is also not just treated as religion, but as a proxy of supposed ethnicity, and a means of racializing identity, so these concepts all become rather blurry. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article claims that Israel has never had a law against miscegenation