Talk:Khalida Jarrar

message: This whole section seems to be a bit of a tempest in a teacup. The linked article does not say  she was denied medical treatment, only that she was initially told she does not need an exit permit, and then when she tried to cross without one, it turned out she actually does. She applied for such a permit, and got one (see the Adameer article in the "External Links" section), and got her treatment in Jordan. Accordingly I am removing this section, All Rows4 (talk) 02:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As the source states "She was not allowed to exit." There is no question that her ability to receive medical care is limited by the Israeli occupiers. 70.50.122.38 (talk) 02:11, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No , what it says, if we don;t cherry-pick statements out of context , is  that she "had to apply for an exit permit via the Civil Administration's health coordinator." And, as the Adammeer link shows, she was allowed to exit once she did that All Rows4 (talk) 04:22, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is clearly just POV pushing by All Rows4, the information is well cited and NPOV. Gouncbeatduke (talk) 12:55, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read my argument and respond to it. All Rows4 (talk) 14:07, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Israeli denial of medical treatment

message: How do we resolve the contradiction between claims that she is under administrative detention (which is detention without charges  or trial) , and the fact that she has been charged, and her trial begun? All Rows4 (talk) 13:51, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: She was arrested for flouting the August 2014 exile order, which was framed as administrative detention.  The commanding officer on 2 April said that was the reason for her arrest and imprisonment. Then a trial was slated, which looks like be delayed, the problem for the Israeli authorities being that the 'evidence' is secreted away and not available to the defendant or her lawyers, which means that putting her on trial, esp. since this case is closely followed abroad, is a tricky business. Until the actual trial takes place and is reported by sources, we have no option but to sit with what sources say. Newspapers are often stupid, and journalists careless about actually thinking about the consequences of their copy-and-paste editorializing.Nishidani (talk) 14:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now clarified the distinction which is made in Addameer's comuniques.Nishidani (talk) 15:47, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, it reads much better now. All Rows4 (talk) 17:27, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Administartive detntion 

message: People might think that this woman is some kind of political or religious prisoner - especially in these circumstances, where different religions are subject to radically different systems of justice.
Now, the PFLP was founded by a Christian and continues to be strongest in those few towns in the West Bank where there is some Christian presence, Ramallah, Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nablus. Some people might think Khalid Jarrar was a Christian and that's the sole reason for putting her in prison.
So why is there no mention of this woman's religion in her article? 86.141.102.161 (talk) 13:55, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: AFAIK, there are no WP:RS stating her religion, find that, and we can include it in the article, Huldra (talk) 23:08, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What religion? 

message: Discuss. El_C 06:22, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no objection to adding that line to the summary of events in my versions of the lead, e,g: "She has been arrested multiple times by the Israeli authorities. Several of these arrests resulted in administrative detention without any charges being brought. She has aslo been charged and convicted of "incitement and involvement in terror", and sentenced to 15 months in prison, of which she served 6, before being released after an international campaign on her behalf". That last part needs to be supported by sources taht say that, of course. Here come the Suns (talk) 15:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: *If you're moving the arrest details to the body, a summary of these details in the lead could be a good compromise to this dispute. SharabSalam, what do you think? El_C 15:44, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

text: *:Absolutely unacceptable wording and compromise, it makes it unclear when she was arrested without charges multiple times and when that one time she was charged and arrested also doesn't mention who brought the charges against her. The current version provides these important contexts and it is an appropriate summary of theses sections Khalida Jarrar#Expulsion order and Khalida Jarrar#Administrative detention and trial (the largest content in this article) while the version that is proposed provide only 2-3 small lines-next to the infobox- for the aforementioned sections, how is this an appropriate summary? --SharabSalam (talk) 23:16, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: My suggested wording states quite clearly that in several of these cases, no charges were brought: "Several of these arrests resulted in administrative detention without any charges being brought". It also says she was arrested by Israeli authorities, but if you want to make it more explicit, we can state that "She has aslo been charged and convicted of "incitement and involvement in terror" by an Israeli military court". The current version is not a summary at all, and in fact contains much information that only appears in the lead, not the article, in contravention of WP:LEAD. Here come the Suns (talk) 01:16, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  if you agree to add these contexts why did you launch an RfC? I agree with your suggestions although I dont see the problem with the current version. It is very important to mention  and  .--SharabSalam (talk) 09:45, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The RfC is to get outside input. Input also about the extent of detail in the lead (versus the body). But if you agree that further summarizing (condensing) the lead and expanding the body is an option, then we have something to work with. El_C 09:56, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok,. let's start with what we agree on, above. Here come the Suns (talk) 16:08, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Arrests and re-arrests (not just the recent one) in the lead or the body?

message: *Alt.2, Huldra (talk) 22:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote

message: Currently the opening paragraph only states that she is a "politician". It seems incredibly biased not to mention that PFLP, which she leads, is designated a terrorist organisation by most of the western world. I tried changing the opening paragraph to the following:
:Khalida Jarrar (Arabic: خالدة جرار‎; born 9 February 1963) is a Palestinian politician.[2] She is a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)[3], which has been designated a terrorist organisation by the United States,[4] Japan,[5] Canada[6], Australia[7] and the European Union.[8] She is also a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), to which she was elected in January 2006 as one of the PFLP's three deputies[9][10] and has continued to serve as an elected representative ever since.
But it was reverted (see my edit from 14:05, 15 July 2021). The reason for reverting was: "Not allowed to edit here, Arbpia. The article is about KJ not about PFLP".
Indeed the article is about KJ, but KJ is one of the leaders of a terrorist organisation, and it seems incredibly one-sided not to mention that and to merely call her a "politician". The opening paragraph of Osama Bin Laden's wiki entry reads:
:Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden[1][7] /oʊˈsɑːmə bɪn ˈlɑːdən/ (Arabic: أسا‌مة بن محمد بن عو‌ض بن لا‌د‌ن‎, Usāmah bin Muḥammad bin Awaḍ bin Lādin; March 10, 1957 – May 2, 2011),[8] also rendered Usama bin Ladin, was a founder of the pan-Islamic militant organization al-Qaeda. The group is designated as a terrorist group by the United Nations Security Council, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the European Union, and various countries.
and no one would consider deleting the fact that al-Qaeda is a terrorist group simply because the entry is "about Bin Laden and not about al-Qaeda". Obviously the fact that the person leads a terrorist organisation is of prime importance to the entry and it would be odd to remove this information.
Can someone who may edit this article please revert back to the changes I made on 14:05, 15 July 2021?
:Try following WP procedure and submit an editrequest.Selfstudier (talk) 21:01, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, I did so now. I did not know this was the procedure. Wikeewike (talk) 21:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  PFLP is a terrorist organisation 

message: The section on Jarrar's family currently reads:
:"The couple have two daughters, Yafa, with a degree in law from the University of Ottawa and Suha, with a master's of science degree in climate change science and policy, who grew up thinking soldiers pounding on one's doors, arrests and the imprisonment of parents was a normal part of children's lives."
I believe the second part of the sentence (which I've bolded to clarify) is unnecessarily editorializing and violates NPOV. I removed it because I believe that it is:
#Unnecessary to provide that level of detail given that the article is about Jarrar and
#The specific phrasing violates WP:NPOV, given how negative the prose is
It is necessary to include detail about Khalida Jarrar's life. There is room to include information written in a neutral manner about her husband's incarceration or Suha and Yafa. But this level of detail examining the mindset of Jarrar's children is unnecessary. I'd like the bolded part to be removed and potentially replaced with a more neutral phrasing that would provide more context to Jarrar's life but without relying on examining her children's beliefs about what is "normal". Perhaps a mention of how Suha was born while her father was incarcerated would be more appropriate. I'd appreciate it if User:Nishidani would collaborate with me on this. Chess (talk) (please use  on reply) 17:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont think there is anything in WP:NPOV that says how negative the prose is has anything to do with its neutrality. Be better as an attributed quote though. But certainly relevant given Suha's subsequent work as a human rights organizer, and dont see why we wouldnt include any detail about the subjects daughter. nableezy - 17:42, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: What's a mindset to do with the price of fish? The detail is  reflexive: Jarrar has this happening to her personally since 1988, and since she married, to her husband and family. It is a repeated regular integral part of their lives. Yes she is the subject, but in the anecdote she is a mother of two children who were made to witness this.  You are, secondly, laboring under an epistemological fallacy. Facts are not neutral or tendentious: they  state what is the ascertained case. The statement is not a belief about normal. We have statistics on how many Palestinian families have experienced nights raids and the resultant traumas, or witnessed them from nearby with neighbours. Such trauma is endemic - a normal part of everyday life there- and, if the source finds it relevant to grasping the topic of the woman's outlook,there's no reason for non-inclusion.  At  Norman Finkelstein we mention his reminiscences of his parents' Stalinism in connection to the Holocaust - both affected him. We mention this personal anecdote for similar reasons, as we do the varied figures in Zeev Sternhell's background, or the extensive quotation about his social environment  in David Ben-Gurion's wikibio, which throws, for me, significant light on certain distinctive traits in his outlook or at Golda Meir where it is noted as formative that her earliest memories of her father boarding the door whenever rumours of an imminent pogrom circulated. I can recall a wikibio of an Israeli who witnessed a relative who was shot, but can't recall which. What is said of Jarrar's daughters is of the same value: she is a woman who raised a family is circumstances of constant fear. Or is it, that being a Palestinians she lacks entitlement to a closer view of the reality she and her family has to cope with?Nishidani (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phrasing in "family" section