Talk:Revisionist Zionism

message: when following the links to some individuals mentioned in this article you will notice the extreme discrepancy in the pictures drawn about the characters in their own wiki.
for example Aryeh Levin or Uri Zvi Greenberg... e.g. Aryeh Levin wiki is litteraly praising him for his "exemplary character traits":
"Reb Aryeh was known for his sublime character traits of "humility, kindness, and respect for all." "Reb Aryeh was humble toward everyone. He treated everyone he met with love, respect, and dignity."[6] "He saw only the good in human beings, even those for whom others rarely had a kind word."[7] "Reb Aryeh Levin was perpetually involved with deeds of charity and helping the poor."[8] " "Reb Aryeh fulfilled the Talmudic law that "One must love his wife like himself, and honor and respect her more than himself." Once Rabbi Aryeh Levin’s wife felt pain in her foot. They went to the doctor together whereupon the doctor asked, "What can I do for you?" Rabbi Levin answered in all sincerity, "Doctor my wife’s foot is hurting us.""
this seems to be in contrast with his encouragement of selfdescribed facists?
further it seems there there are edit wars going on in favour of erasing any link to revisionist zionism, e.g. see the talk page of Uri_Zvi_Greenberg  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.51.13.19 (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  follow up discrepancies 

message: I just went through this doing a general copy edit and came across "However, the left-wing part of Kach also claimed to be the inheritors of Revisionist Zionism—" This may be my ignorance, but  "left-wing part of Kach" sounds to me like "the Jewish part of the Russian imperial family". Was there a "left-wing part of Kach"? Who would that have been? What did they stand for? -- Jmabel | Talk 02:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is not enough at Baruch Marzel to give me a clue what this means politically. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kach 

message: Inserted main heading above. --Ludvikus (talk) 16:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *From the article: In 1925, Jabotinsky formed the Revisionist Zionist Alliance How can "Revisionist Zionism" be either original research or a neologism? — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Revisionism|Revisionism (disambiguation)]]

message: Is that correct? That's what the Wikipedia:Disambiguation page says at Revisionism. --Ludvikus (talk) 15:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "*[[Revisionist Zionism]], a movement that argues the terms of the British Mandate in Palestine." 

message: *Reference: A History of the Jewish People, ed. by H. H. Ben-Sasson (Harvard University Press, 1969, 1976) "Revisionsts", p. 1159.  --Ludvikus (talk) 16:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *From the article: In 1925, Jabotinsky formed the Revisionist Zionist Alliance How can "Revisionist Zionism" be either original research or a neologism? — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Revisionism (Zionism)]]

message: Ludvikus has suggested renaming this article "Revisionism (Zionism)". I think this is inappropriate.
There is a Zionist movement called Revisionist Zionism. In a general context, I don't think anybody uses the word Revisionism by itself when they refer to Revisionist Zionism. (In a specifically Zionist context, one might speak of Revisionism or Revisionist but this is a shorthand, just as one might speak of Labor to mean Labor Zionism.) I don't think there's any chance that somebody who comes to Wikipedia looking for information about Revisionist Zionism will type Revisionism and expect to find an article about Revisionist Zionism — but per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision) and Wikipedia:Disambiguation, this is the only reason one might name an article "Revisionism (Zionism)". — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 16:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Revisionism (Zionism)"

message: *Keep. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Voting

message: That's a summary of my point. --Ludvikus (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Revisionist Zionism, briefly Revisionists, also Union of Zionist-Revisionists, later Likud --Ludvikus (talk) 20:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Your work is being reverted because it's just plain wrong. Revisionist Zionism is a philosophy and political movement. Revisionists are people who espouse Revisionist Zionism. The Union of Zionist-Revisionists was an organization of Revisionists. Likud is a political party that supports (or once supported) the principles of Revisionist Zionism. Four different animals: philosophy/movement, people, organization, political party. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 20:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

text: *Good. OK. Then why don't you Disambiguate? If I'm wrong, it's your fault. You've completely ignored my repeated requests for it. Perhaps you do not know what WP:DAB is? If you knew it, or did it, we would not be in this predicament. Answer me about Disambiguation, please. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Why does Wikipedia need a disambiguation page? There isn't any confusion between the articles about Revisionist Zionism, the Union of Zionist-Revisionists, and Likud. Nobody is likely to type one phrase when they meant to type the other. Perhaps you should read WP:DAB to make sure you understand the purpose of a disambiguation page. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 21:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

text: *We're getting somewhere, brother. I've just inserted your exact word above into Revisionism, which is a DAB page. Know please go there and WP:cleanup after me]], consistent with your distinctions. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisionist Zionism, briefly [[Revisionist]]s, also [[Union of Zionist-Revisionists]], later [[Likud]] 

message: One, single, editor persist in Reverting all my work. I will therefore, reproduce here, for archival purposes, what I hold to be the better opening (--Ludvikus (talk) 20:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Revisionist Zionism, briefly Revisionists, also Union of Zionist-Revisionists, later Likud --Ludvikus (talk) 20:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Your work is being reverted because it's just plain wrong. Revisionist Zionism is a philosophy and political movement. Revisionists are people who espouse Revisionist Zionism. The Union of Zionist-Revisionists was an organization of Revisionists. Likud is a political party that supports (or once supported) the principles of Revisionist Zionism. Four different animals: philosophy/movement, people, organization, political party. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 20:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

text: *Good. OK. Then why don't you Disambiguate? If I'm wrong, it's your fault. You've completely ignored my repeated requests for it. Perhaps you do not know what WP:DAB is? If you knew it, or did it, we would not be in this predicament. Answer me about Disambiguation, please. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Why does Wikipedia need a disambiguation page? There isn't any confusion between the articles about Revisionist Zionism, the Union of Zionist-Revisionists, and Likud. Nobody is likely to type one phrase when they meant to type the other. Perhaps you should read WP:DAB to make sure you understand the purpose of a disambiguation page. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 21:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

text: *We're getting somewhere, brother. I've just inserted your exact word above into Revisionism, which is a DAB page. Know please go there and WP:cleanup after me]], consistent with your distinctions. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I do not wish to participate in an Edit War 

message: What on earth is happening here? This is the worst structured talk page I have ever seen. Is it a requested move or an argument about the disambiguation page? Regardless, the article is at the correct location (Revisionist Zionism), no question. пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Bear with me, please. I'm trying to gather evidence as to what the correct name of the article should be. The article is about a movement within Zionism. And it turns out that Jabotinsky had formed "official" organizations from which the movement's name derives. I'm gathering evidence that the name we've got now for the article is a WP:neologism. --Ludvikus (talk) 16:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Number 57. Article is in the right place, the way Marxist feminism, for example, should not be moved to "Feminism (Marxist)". -- Nudve (talk) 16:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In 1925, Jabotinsky formed the Revisionist Zionist Alliance Revisionist Zionism is not a neologism, nor is it original research. You've been trying to make this argument for several days. Now you're just being disruptive. Please stop. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 16:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: PS: Why are we having this discussion for the third time? See #"Revisionism (Zionism)". — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 16:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at #5 above, you see the following: Zionist revisionist movement. I don't think we should invent names to suit Wikipedia when a proper name or common name exists. In our case, the original name derives at least from the American union which Jabotinsky formed, namely: the Union of Zionist-Revisionists.  --Ludvikus (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Malik, Nudve and No. 57.  It's time to leave it be.  Revisionist Zionism is the name it's known by, more than any other. There is none more appropriate. Please stop wasting other editors' time. Hertz1888 (talk) 17:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your "PS" comment, User:Malik Shabazz, immediately above, is out of sequence. Please give me a moment, and I shall respond to it appropriately. --Ludvikus (talk) 17:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Besides me and you, User:Malik Shabazz, the only other active editor on this talk page was User:Boodlesthecat. And he has so far said nothing. It appears to me that your opinions are different than mine - from that it does not follow that the expression of mine here are "disruptive." As to your more specific point, I'm now proposing a different name than I did before. Futhermore, I feel I need to say that, no Wikipedia is the private turf of anyone, and it's my experience that Wikipedia's articles are constantly getting better as time moves forward. And no one, or two, editors can dictate to a third what he or she must do. Now lets get back to the issue at hand:
*As I've indicate above, it would appear that Zionist revisionist movement is the best tile for our article. I wish to direct you all to the Archives which support this name as most appropriate as well. --Ludvikus (talk) 17:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Ludvikus, stop it already before your endless disruptions get you blocked. OK, I said something. Happy? And yet again, stop using bullets on talk pages. Boodlesthecat Meow? 17:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ludvikus, this is the second time you have moved this article against consensus. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What consensus. You were away. And it was just me and him. It appear there are only two editers talking to each other lately. Where did you come from? --Ludvikus (talk) 18:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: No, that is not the best title, because it is not necessarily a movement - it's an opinion, a way of thinking. Please do not move it again. пﮟოьεԻ 57 18:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "What consensus"?!? The three editors beside me and Boodles who said to leave the article where it is during the two hours before you unilaterally decided to move the page. That's the consensus. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 18:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Er, not it isn't. See the Jewish Virtual Library article or Zionism-Israel. If anything is an expert source on Judaism/Zionism, I'd say they are. пﮟოьεԻ 57 18:38, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You cite good source. And these are important. However, I think the problem is that the article is sloppy about what it is about. You should not confuse Likud with Jabotinsky's original organization, of which the latter is a successor. --Ludvikus (talk) 18:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Also, although the JVL is a wonderful organization, and does good things, it it is not a primary scholarly source - like a pear reviewed journal. --Ludvikus (talk) 18:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: For example, Antisemites who propgagate the Protocols of Zion invented the idea that the so-called "Elders of Zion" were the participants in the First Zionist Congress. In order to show the ridiculousness of this view I contacted by email the JVL, and they told me that they didn't know - that I should go to the archives of the American Jewish Committee. So although the JVL is a great source of useful leads, it is ultimately an advocacy group. The place to go is to the historical journals which, by subscription, are available to anyone who pays. --Ludvikus (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text:  Notice further what the JVL makes reference to: Revisionist Zionist Alliance - who are they, why do we have no reference to them, and did the JVL get it wrong? Look at the  I've recently created: Union of Zionist-Revisionists. --Ludvikus (talk) 19:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ludvikus, stop it. You troll through Google trying to find quotes to support your moves after you make them ("Bear with me, please. I'm trying to gather evidence..." you say above), but you apparently have zero comprehension or knowledge of the subjects you are googling. Stop it. Boodlesthecat Meow? 19:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: What on earth?

message: I just archived all threads that haven't had any responses since 2006. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 18:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving old messages 

message: Egypt is misspelled on the map.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.73.24.179 (talk) 16:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  map 

message: Content is lacking on "Berit ha-Hayyal" (Hebrew: Union of Army Veterans), a Revisionist organization in Europe and Mandate Palestine of the 1920s and '30s. See Encyclopedia Judaica 14:129. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Union of Army Veterans  

message: — Assignment last updated by Bane117 (talk) 03:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Zionism and the Roads Not Taken 1880-1948

message: I find the article a bit confusing in the lack of established clarity on whether revisionist Zionism continues to exist, or whether it was just a historically influential movement. Zanahary (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does it still exist? 

message: Link for Histadrut Susanod (talk) 14:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Already done Per MOS:DUPLINK only the first occurrence needs to be linked, and it already is. Jamedeus (talk) 18:37, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 May 2024