Talk:Pierre Rehov

message: "Claims" is a non-neutral word. "States" is neutral. Please respect WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 15:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Claims" is appropriate since what he is claiming is itself non-neutral.--Kitrus 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure it's your opinion that it's non-neutral. Nevertheless, WP:NPOV requires that we use neutral terms when describing positions. See WP:NPOV#Fairness_of_tone. This is policy, so please stop ignoring it. Jayjg (talk) 12:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that "claims" is not neutral. Changing to "states."
I've removed the following WP:BLP violation to the Talk: page for now:
Pierre Rehov is criticized by anti-Zionists for a lack of objectivity and depth. His work systematically depicts Israelis as victimized protagonists, and Palestinians as manipulative aggressors.
User:Kitrus added the link at the end of the paragraph, but the source makes none of the claims that are actually in the sentence. Jayjg (talk) 15:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I added the N.Y. Times link several months ago, found it deleted (I wonder why) and re-added it recently without re-reading it. Another source should replace it as a reference to the claim of bias. Rehov is clearly biased.--Kitrus 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First you have to find a link that actually supports your claim, though. Do you have such a link? Please abide by WP:V, which is policy. Jayjg (talk) 12:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Have you actually read the policy? You're doing the exact opposite; you're asserting your personal opinions as fact, rather than what I have done, which is attribute the opinions to the people who have stated them. Please explain which statements in the article you think fail WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 12:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually on a CNN interview available on YouTube (or a Daily Show interview, can't remember for sure), Rehov says that "Islam is a beautiful religion" and claims that the extremists are corrupting its image. Not sure how this is important to the article. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 15:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you read again the interview with Cochran. Besides, the excuse Rehov cites (extremist corrupting the image of Islam) is yet another justification of prejudice and bigotry. Anti-semites have often used the "Zionist actions" to denigrate the Jewish faith and to accuse Jews of all kind of horrible things. Rehov is doing the same towards Muslims. If you don't see it, re-read the interview and replace Islam by Judaism and Muslims by Jews.(Casa2000 (talk) 02:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "States" vs. "Claims" 

message: Jaakobou, since you won't stop trying to insert your Zionist-centric views into this article, I've decided to delete the reference to Hannity & Colmes altogether.  What partisans might be saying in support of their ideological brethren does not constitute ostensibly impartial commentary (of the type exemplified by the NYT review, as pointed out by 151.201.141.132), and violates WP:NPOV.  Your blatant and transparent attempt to muddy the water by comparing third party criticism for Rehov's filmmaking with partisan cheerleading is illegitimate and agenda-driven and has no place here.Stingray86 19:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Stingray86, (1) try giving a look at WP:CIV. (2) i simply reverted one POV with the other POV, your choice to prefer one POV over the other does not constitute WP:NPOV. (3) NYT is not impartial, best i reccolect, they allow terrorists to have their own op-ed articles... or was that the LAT, i'm not 100% sure. JaakobouChalk Talk 10:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

text: personal attacks are frowned upon in wiki, just NPOV the article instead of making personal attacks. JaakobouChalk Talk 12:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: the text:
::Rehov's latest film, 2006's "Suicide Killers," was supported by Hannity & Colmes who asserted that it would reveal "the nature of the enemy".
why is this information taken out of the article? JaakobouChalk Talk 12:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  hannity and colmes 

message: Bias in the phrase "He made later a film on the Jewish refugees (Silent Exodus) describing the fate of the million Jews expelled from Arab countries after 1948, but deliberately forgot to describe his own community from Algeria, considering that the Algerian war was a colonial problem involving France more than the Jewish community."
"Deliberately forgot" is a very biased turn of phrase, an accusation of duplicity. Changing it to "He chose not to describe his own community from Algeria, since the Algerian war was a colonial problem involving France more than the Jewish community."75.85.81.0 (talk) 01:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias in this sentence 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:24, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion