Talk:Arab citizens of Israel/Archive 4

message: I have shorted what supposed to be a small note that have balooned to a large paragraph. Also removed parts which are unrelevant to the subject matter. Zeq 05:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What you removed was highly relevant. I have restored it. Tiamut 08:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "highly relevant" - not at all. in fact if you want to use WP:undue the terminlogy section is the place to start. This article is way way too long. Zeq 08:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The material you removed was directly relevant to the definition of Arab citizens. The paragraph preceding the one you removed is less relevant and could be taken out if your concern was the length of the article. As it is, the material together provides balance and context. I don't want to fight over it and suggest you leave well enough alone. Tiamut 08:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes on terminology section 

message: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/stage/dance/article2886439.ece
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6254691.stm
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3471145,00.html
Majadele said, "I am a Muslim first, and a government minister second."
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/925030.html
some academic sources on the Arab-Israeli POV:  http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=obTYDj0rNZgC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=%22Shafir%22+%22Being+Israeli:+The+Dynamics+of+Multiple+Citizenship%22+&ots=VmAq8Y17qy&sig=tKyzmeXD6VbiqxhaCyHuXx9WubA#PPA127,M1  page 127
The desire to get israeli citzenship and become an israeli Arab":  http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/11/palestinians_applying_for_israeli_citizenship_in_droves/
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/11/07/palestinians_seek_israeli_citizenship/4712/
and this:  http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3473006,00.html
Zeq (talk) 16:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources 

message: According to this Haaretz article all Israeli arabs drive mercedes:  http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=927861&contrassID=2&subContrassID=4&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y . it is OR but I know that is not true. --Zeq (talk) 21:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh come on Zeq, that's not even what the article claims. It states that ONE storekeeper in Beit Hanina (in 1967-occupied Jerusalem) makes this claim; neither the author nor Haaretz makes such a ridiculous assertion. RolandR (talk) 22:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Roland, read the article pelease before making more claims. It sais that this is what most Palestinians think about the Arab israelis: That they ALL drive mercedes. The one shopkipper is just the start of the article, do read more..... "Of course this was just one man's opinion, but there is little doubt that it is representative of a widespread feeling among our Palestinian brethren, who expresses an objective reality. " --Zeq (talk) 04:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Zeq, this is an opinion piece. The author says that it is his opinion that Palestinians generally view Israeli Arabs and privileged and rich. I think he is in a reasonable position to arrive at that conclusion. I don't think the Palestinian literally meant that the author drives around in a Mercedes. I think he was being figurative. At any rate, this is hardly solid evidence that all Israeli Arabs drive around in Mercedes. Of course... it would be nice if we all did. Screen stalker (talk) 08:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mercedes 

message: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3355492,00.html Zeq (talk) 07:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academic source 

message: I have moved that section to an article as titled in the heading above. I did that because the article is long, the discussion is related but can stand alone on its own though linked to this article.  restored it again and redirected the new article back here. I restored the old changes.  just restored it again. Can someone please explain why the farming out of this information to a new article is problematic for them? We could include a paragraph on the subject here along with a link to the article. Does that sound better? Tiamut 00:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: to be frank, the section is not that long, but you've made a reasonable case for a desirable change - i.e. to shorten it to a one-two paragraphs and add a 'main article' link at the top. be sure to write that paragraph fairly though. JaakobouChalk Talk 03:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for considering that Jaakobou. Why don't you write a draft paragraph of what you'd like to see included. Tiamut 00:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Restoring [[Demographic threat (Israel)]] section

message: This quotation by Avraham Tal seems unnecessary:
:The leadership and the liberal Jewish public accept Israeli Arabs as citizens with equal rights, with the exception of certain areas that touch on Israel's essence as a Jewish state (such as the Law of Return and the Law of Citizenship). All would agree that, over the years, the Arab minority has suffered discrimination in certain areas and that this must be remedied. But the leaders of the Arabs in Israel are trying to show that their loyalty is not given to the State of Israel in its present incarnation, but only to a binational Jewish-Arab state on the territory of Israel, or to a Palestinian state on all the territory of the Land of Israel.
I don't think it adds anything to the article, as it is very vague and does not even claim to be up-to-date. What's more it's an opinion piece. Would anyone object to its removal? Screen stalker (talk) 00:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing no objections, I have removed it. If anyone does object, feel free to revert and discuss. Let's try to make some more headway in cutting that section down. It is quite long. Screen stalker (talk) 07:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avraham Tal Quotation 

message: The article's citation of sources is fairly weak. The following problems are prevalent:
* The same sources repeat unnecessarily (when they could be referenced by name multiple times). I believe I caught most of not all of the instances of this, but I could be wrong.
* Many URLs are linked without an actual citation, but just a link symbol. I would rather move away from this because the reader has to open the link to see what the source is.
* Some of the links may be dead (so far I have found one).
* Some of the sources are of questionable accuracy. For example, as much as I respect the Jewish Virtual Library, we really should go back to the sources that they cite (if possible). If this is not possible, then I guess it will be alright to quote sources, provided that they have at least reasonable credibility (such as the Jewish Virtual Library). I would rather avoid this, however.
* There are some unsourced statements in this article.
Please help me fix incorrenct or inconsistent citations and make this article more streamlined, including, if necessary, by using the  tag. Citations such as this are part of the reason why high school students are not allowed to cite Wikipedia in their papers... Screen stalker (talk) 10:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Citations 

message: This section seems superfluous to me. Its content is too anecdotal to be of much value, and it doesn't speak to any overarching trends. In an article that is almost twice as long as Wikipedia articles should be, this would be a good section to cut out altogether.
Thoughts? Screen stalker (talk) 06:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know it's only been two days, but I really feel this is a no-objection issue, so I will proceed with deletion. If there are objections, feel free to revert. Screen stalker (talk) 10:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, you removal of such a large chunk has not been identified as vandalism? Why should this be? Chesdovi (talk) 21:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why should it be identified as vandalism? Screen stalker (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was hoping RolandR would enlighten us why this may be, or not, as it is in this case. Chesdovi (talk) 13:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it wasn't vandalism. RolandR (talk) 16:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Examples of Integration" Section