Talk:Israel and apartheid/Archive 3

message: When you are in a hole the first thing is to stop digging. Zeq 07:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Free advice to Homey

message: My understanding is that the source (global Exchnage) used for most of this article does not meet WP:RS as well as this decision by ArbCom:
 Verifiability and sources
2) Information used in articles, especially those whose content is contested, should be verified by reference to a reliable and scholarly source, see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. 
Support: 
Fred Bauder 21:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decision by ArbCom 

message: Imagine that an article on the Iranian president will look like this:
http://babakdenver.blogspot.com/2006/05/is-iran-president-ahmadinejad-crazy-or.html
======One side======
The Iranian presdient is a lunatic because ......
======The other side======
Other argue He is not lunatic becase.......
This is NPOV ? 
Clearly not. because NPOV does not mean getting a stage to a wild accuastion and then using Wikipedia to discuss the rights and wrong of that minority view. 12:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete failure of NPOV - again 

message: Other argue He is not lunatic becase.......
This is NPOV ? 
Clearly not. because NPOV does not mean getting a stage to a wild accuastion and then using Wikipedia to discuss the rights and wrong of that minority view. 12:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The other side

message: Under the remedy in Zeq's arbitration case he may be banned for good cause by any administrator from any article which he disrupts by tendentious (aggressive biased) editing. While I would not have banned Zeq myself from this article (he had not done a lot of edit warring and was using the talk page to discuss issues) there are sufficient grounds (in my opinion) to ban him. He should only be blocked if he violates the ban by attempting to edit the article. Fred Bauder 13:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Banning of Zeq

message: From the Jerusalem Post:
:May. 15, 2006 1:41 | Updated May. 15, 2006 9:18
:Left appalled by citizenship ruling
:By SHEERA CLAIRE FRENKEL
           
:Israel was branded an "apartheid state" by left-wing Knesset members on Sunday, who responded fiercely to the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the existing Citizenship and Entry Law.
Homey 17:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The " " sais it all. RenyD 17:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it says that certain members of the Knesset used that term to describe Israel.  People use quotation marks when they wish to repeat word-for-word what another individual has stated. --Strothra 18:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: There are lots of political parties who are members of Socialist international but can really no longer be called socialist, it is the same thing for WZO.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 18:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Your molding whatever I said into a strawman version without addressing a single real argument.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Left Zionists and Israeli apartheid 

message: Jay, how can you possibly argue that linking Bantustans with apartheid is "original research"?  See and . Any sources on Bantustans will speak of them being a feature of apartheid and vice versa.  The reference to Bantustans and the West Bank should be restored as clearly referring to Bantustans is a reference to apartheid. Or is it your argument that Bantustan is not an Afrikaans word but a Hebrew or Arabic one? If so I'd love to see your sources.  Homey 19:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about a phrase, it's not a soapbox for an argument.  Please find sources promoting that phrase, not anything remotely related. Jayjg (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It's about the phrase Israeli apartheid, not about various arguments people use to vilify Israel.  Please ensure the article is kept on subject, thanks. Jayjg (talk) 20:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The same person who alleged that Israel is setting up "Bantustans" also alleged it is setting up "cantons" - in the same sentence, and in trhe same context. Shall we rename this article Israeli Switzerland? Or should we go edit the Switzerland article to reflect that the Swiss federal system is actually a variant of Apartheid? Isarig 01:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bantustans and apartheid

message: The article seems to focus on the fact that non-notables like student demonstrators use the term, but fails to note its prevalent use among neo-Nazis and anti-Semites such as David Duke and Jew Watch.  I've rectified that.  Let's make sure we give the reader the complete picture of the phrase's use. Jayjg (talk) 20:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Homey, it doesn't matter how many times DD repeated it - once is enough. Both DD and JW are in the mainstream of what they and you carefully call "critics of Israel" or "critics of Zionism" and insist that they work only to educate the public. We cannot ignore the major antisemitic component in this namecalling and one-dimensional POV that you keep pushing onto WP. I can professionally translate some articles published by the Interregional Academy of Personnel Management (often featuring DD), it is much less selective in their "criticism" than English-language press. ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other uses ignored