Talk:Occupation 101

message: <snipped entire section. nothing to do with the article; just a long and hostile exchange on the "propaganda" vs "informative" nature of the film. see WP:TALK, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:NPA, etc.> <eleland/talkedits> 00:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Later note: Returned comments below blanked by Eleland. I am noting a pattern here of blanking by Eleland in both the article and on the talk page. Much of the comment material is ontopic for a wikipedia talk page. See WP:TALK. Some of the material is offtopic for a talk page, but mass blind reversions of large parts of talk pages and articles is not the way to fix problems. Please take the time to do a proper edit. Old comments follow after the horizontal lines. --Timeshifter 18:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My personal opinion is that I agree with you. Israel does have a right to exist, and terrorism can't be justified. However, what you and I believe or agree about doesn't matter to Wikipedia. This is an Encyclopedia, we don't call anyone "nut jobs" and the articles are supposed to be neutral and fair to all notable opinions. Please read WP:NPOV. If you want to add criticism, then find a notable source that criticizes the movie, and quote from that source. -- Karl Meier 19:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

text: What the article currently does is basically to mention that it's subject is a documentary on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and then it list what specific issues and subjects it discuss. I don't understand how that should make the article "deceptive and to be honest a blatant lie"? Also, I don't see where the article claim that the creators of the movie are "even handed"? Could you please be more specific about which parts of the article that you believe is not as neutral as they should be? A different issue is that you are (as mentioned) very welcome to (re)add criticism from notable sources, as long as you are very specific about them. Who is it that has criticized the movie and what have they criticized it for? -- Karl Meier 22:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: Someone put up a notice at the top of the article concerning possible copyright infringement. The notice says the infringement concerns 
*http://www.occupation101.com/about.html --Timeshifter 08:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the copyrighted text. --Timeshifter 08:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Copyright Infringement 

message: Here is the cast info Tewfik and Armon keep deleting large parts from:
The entire list of featured interviews Occupation 101 :: Interviewees. From official Occupation101.com site.:
*Dr. Albert Aghazarian. Director of Public Relations at Birzeit University. Palestinian Armenian.
*Ambassador James E. Akins. Former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
*Rabbi Arik Ascherman. Rabbis for Human Rights. Israeli.
*Dr. William Baker (theologian). Christians and Muslims for Peace.
*Bishop Allen Bartlett, Jr. Diocese of Washington.
*Phyllis Bennis. Institute for Policy Studies, and co-chair of the U.S. Campaign to End Israeli Occupation.
*Peter Boukaert. Director of Emergencies at Human Rights Watch.
*Sharon Burke. Former Advocacy Director of Amnesty International.
*Noam Chomsky. Political Analyst - MIT Professor.
*Father Drew Christiansen. United States Catholic Conference.
*Cindy and Craig Corrie. Parents of late peace activist Rachel Corrie.
*Douglas Dicks. Catholic Relief Services in Jerusalem. Outreach program director.
*Richard Falk. 2001 United Nations Fact-finding Commission in the West Bank and Gaza.
*Paul Findley. U.S. Congressman 1961-1983.
*Thomas Getman. World Vision International.
*Neta Golan. Israeli co-founder of International Solidarity Movement.
*Jeff Halper. Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions.
*Amira Hass. Israeli Journalist -- Ha'aretz.
*Doug Hostetter. Fellowship of Reconciliation.
*Kathy Kamphoefner. Christian Peacemaker Team.
*Adam Keller. Gush Shalom - Israeli Peace Group.
*Hava Keller. Woman's Organization for Political Prisoners.
*Rashid Khalidi. School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia U.
*Peretz Kidron. Yesh Gvul - Israeli Peace Group.
*Rabbi Michael Lerner. Tikkun Community.
*Rabbi Rebecca Lillian. Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace.
*Roger Normand. Center for Economic and Social Rights.
*Allegra Pacheco. Israeli human rights Lawyer.
*Ilan Pappe. Israeli historian - Haifa University.
*Dr. Iyad Sarraj. Prominent Palestinian psychiatrist.
*Yael Stein. B'Tselem - Israeli human rights group.
*Gila Svirsky. Coalition of Women for a Just Peace. Israeli.
*Ambassador Edward Walker. Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel.
*Alison Weir. If Americans Knew.
Most of them are well know anti-israeli propagandists.Marcus  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.79.57.29 (talk) 23:40, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Convenience break 

message: Concerning the Occupation 101 article on a documentary about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There is dispute about an attempt to remove the info about many of the featured interviewees and their wikilinked affiliations.--Timeshifter 19:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of interviewees and wikilinked affiliations 

message: I really don't care either way any more; I think continuing to squabble shows poor judgment on both sides. The cast list is one or two clicks away via EL's. Just stop fighting over such a stupid non-issue. Get the page protected indef, I don't care. <eleland/talkedits> 18:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast list 

message: Tewfik. What "nonneutral rhetoric" are you referring to in your previous reply? I asked you once already about this, and you refuse to reply. 
In a later edit summary after doing the same large blanking revert  you wrote "accusation not even remotely true; rv replacement of sourced passages with or".
My accusation in an edit summary  was that you refuse to reply on this talk page. My edit summary: "Try using the talk page, Tewfik. You have been asked a question there, and refused to answer." 
Now you throw in "or" (Original research) in your last edit summary that I quoted. What "Original research"? Everything is sourced that I put in the interviewee list that you keep blanking large parts of. Also in the intro that you keep removing parts of. 
So are you going to continue to refuse to reply? 
Tiamut, Hazard911, and I believe the entire featured interviewees list with detailed affiliation wikilinks should remain. 
I gave several examples of other films and documentaries with similar numbers of cast members or interviewees discussed or listed:
*The American Film Institute Salute to Frank Capra#Cast
*The Great Global Warming Swindle#Contributors to the programme
*What the Bleep Do We Know!?#Credits
*What the Bleep Do We Know!?#Featured individuals
*The Hollywood Ten#Cast
*Rain Man#Cast
*Independence Day (film)#Cast and characters
Shuki, like you, wanted to just leave up "the shortened one-sided list of fringe leftists" that you prefer in your edits. See Shuki's comment higher up. I don't know if the people listed in your preferred shortened interviewee list are "fringe leftists" or not. But a shortened POV selection is against WP:NPOV. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "nonneutral rhetoric" and "or" (original research) claims by Tewfik 

message: I removed a section on criticism in which the only discussion +lengthy quote was from CAMERA. I don't think CAMERA should be completely ignored, but there are two concerns here:
*There are no other critics in that section, by which I mean reviews, positive or negative - so including just CAMERA is undue weight 
*The quote was added by some sort of role account with a history of adding quotes from CAMERA to all sorts of articles. 
I am looking right now for reviews. To start off with, I will add some negative reviews, since there are bound to be some; the only one I've found right now is from WorldNetDaily, which is equally marginal. Relata refero (talk) 13:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section 

message: Quite a Blatant admission of Bias and Dishonest Editing.
CAMERA is not "Marginal", it is Well researched by any standard and regularly gets corrections from Mainstream Media Outlets worldwide.
But Wikipedia, written by amateurs and edited by Leftist Bigots, is somehow above their professional grade critique.
WorldNetDaily, with it's evangelical outlook, would be "marginal" but you Dishonest anti-Israel Clowns have no business Eclipsing CAMERA.
-  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.255.135.68 (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dishonestly Removed section