Talk:Omar Barghouti

message: I edited this stub as requested.  Can I challenge its neutrality? What can I do to help improve this? Bearian 22:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the Jewish Chronicle as a source for that statement. there are many more , in the Gruniard, etc... Momma's Little Helper (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 23:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality?

message: The phrase "After debunking several of his statements" is an unsupported assessment of the accuracy of a Daily News article itself and should be removed.
Gnaevets2 (talk) 13:45, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Removed the quoted phrase above. Left the rest as it's attributed to the Daily News. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 15:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 9 May 2013 

message: He is also a choreographer. It should be mentioned.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.232.190.128 (talk) 19:05, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Choreographer 

message: I removed a paragraph containing statements of fact that were sourced to an op-ed .  This was reverted, with an edit summary saying that the passage did not include statements of fact .  Here is an example: "He also denied a right to self-determination of the Jewish people."  This is clearly a statement of fact.  It now needs to be removed.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The paragraph starts with an attribution. If you want to put attribution at the begining of each and every single sentence, go ahead. The reference closes the paragraph and it is clear it all belongs together. 95.86.114.137 (talk) 12:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As 95.86... says, that entire paragraph is attributed, in the first sentence which begins "Roberta Seid describes...". I don't think any reasonable person would mistake the 2nd or 3rd sentence for a non-attributed statement of fact, but if you feel there may be confusion, add "She also said..." or something similar before them. All Rows4 (talk) 13:31, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether he denied a right of self-determination is not something that can be a matter of opinion.  He either did or he didn't; either way, it would be a fact.  Using someone's attributed view via an op-ed does not conform with WP:RS.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:53, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it is a matter of opinion, unless he was quoted directly. If he aid something like "Israel should not be a Jewish state, it should be a bi-national one", one can interpret that as denial of the Jewish right to self determination. that is an interpretation , and hence, an opinion. Attributed opinions are perfectly in line with WP:RS, reread it.All Rows4 (talk) 15:16, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: An op-ed from a non-notable? You are really scraping the bottom of the barrel, here. Should be removed. Huldra (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes you think she is not notable? She is an academic, an historian, specializing in Israeli history. She currently holds research positions in academic institutions. All Rows4 (talk) 23:03, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

text: I've attributed every sentence. I hope that solves the problem. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 22:41, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper use of op-eds 

message: There is an obvious bias in the presentation of the material on Omar Barghouti as it now stands. Particular problems have been pointed out by others.  The most damaging element(to Wikipedia as well as the subject matter and the truth)is that the writer/editors' intention is apparently to label Mr. Barghouti negatively in various ways rather than openly and fully explore his actions, words and beliefs. Poor documentation aside, using sources like a New York newspapers' Editorial Bd's opinions amounts to using Wikipedia as a political opinion forum rather than an encyclopedia. Allowing this type of posting on Wiki does irreparable damage to intellectual exploration and to the integrity of 2602:306:326F:8BE0:3C1D:F685:1E09:742F (talk) 17:54, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  biased presentation of Omar Barghouti 

message: I wanted to add the following sentence and citation after the existing passage beginning "In response to BDS being referred to as anti-Semitic" (as of June 21, 2018): "Barghouti has also spoken out against anti-Semitism in the Palestinian solidarity movement." citations: 1) https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/palestinian-writers-activists-disavow-racism-anti-semitism-gilad-atzmon and 2) https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/struggle-palestinian-rights-incompatible-any-form-racism-or-bigotry-statement
I wish to add these edits to show evidence that Barghouti has spoken out against anti-Semitism to offer a balance to the assertions that he is "anti-Israel" and "anti-Semitic." Wonderstrider01 (talk) 16:47, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Assuming Electronic Intifada is reliable as it's already being used for other references within the article. Fish+Karate 09:11, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Such controversial edits to such article should gain consensus first per WP:ER . Though AI  may be reliable for views of Barghuti but its clearly WP:UNDUE Shrike (talk) 15:45, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Seemed uncontroversial to me but fair enough. I was just clearing protected edit requests, I don’t mind what the article says. Fish+Karate 20:22, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 June 2018 

message: "The descendants of Palestinian refugees will have the right to immigrate to this state, while Jews from the Jewish diaspora will not, in opposition to the current situation.[18]" This statement mischaracterizes its citation. The citation from Electronic Intifada states that, "The historic land of Palestine belongs to all who live in it and to those who were expelled or exiled from it since 1948, regardless of religion, ethnicity, national origin or current citizenship status," and further goes on to support a "Right of Return for Palestinian refugees". It is likely that the declaration is in opposition to the Israeli Law of Return which gives preference to Jews immigrating to Israel, leading to the possible confusion.
"This solution has thus been criticized[who?] as being, effectively, a national Palestinian state," has no citation, but if any can be found, then this statement doesn't need to be outright removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenwave (talk • contribs) 17:42, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to Remove/Edit Unsourced Statement in "Views" 

message: Why, in a religious flash-point like Israel, is there no mention of what religion Barghouti is? What well-know Arab personage, has an article written about them, that doesn't state their religious background? Intentionally leaving out that information draws suspicion to the neutrality of the article.Jimhoward72 (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Intentionally Deceptive Article - what religion is he?

message: According to https://www.thejc.com/comment/comment/no-omar-barghouti-is-not-a-co-founder-of-the-israel-boycott-movement-bds-1.489828 Omar Barghouti isn't a co-founder of BDS. Perhaps the article should refer to that. Mcljlm (talk) 23:43, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: NGO Monitor isn't credible. Usually when someone founds something successful they want to be known for it. But here we have a cabal of international and Palestinian NGO's using Barghouti as a frontman and letting him get all the credit. Not plausible.ImTheIP (talk) 01:27, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  BDS 

message: The Yisrael Katz linked is the wrong one (the one currently linked to died six years before the event) 2A10:8004:9E2E:0:D9C8:BA9B:A3F1:B50D (talk) 06:27, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request for section on Israeli government intimidation 

message: Married to Palestinian-Israeli, not Arab-Israeli. Hkhuri (talk) 12:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: changing wouldn't explain the Israeli permanent residency. M.Bitton (talk) 14:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 December 2023 

message: As EI is depreciated per  RFC: Electronic Intifada, I have removed all uses that aren’t ABOUTSELF and replaced them with cn, while leaving those that I consider ABOUTSELF. If someone disagrees with this course of action or a specific choice, I am happy to discuss. FortunateSons (talk) 11:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heavy sourcing from depreciated (and highly unreliable) EI, which to keep and which to delete?