Talk:Dalal Mughrabi

message: :She was slained after being out of amunition and got captured. A practice well know by Israeli Army to kill POW. Every body can research this in the various massacres done against Arab POW
::If you have any proof of this claim then please add the reference to it in the text. Until then, it remains unsupported speculation and out of WP. Also, sign your names next time. altmany 08:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: The single source used for this article (a Time magazine blog entry) is riddled with errors - it claims 70 killed in the Coastal Road Massacre (when just about every other reliable source gives a figure half as high), it says Israel's parliament is in Tel Aviv, and claims the bus was stopped by an Army unit, when the Coastal Road Massacre documents multiple sources syaing it was a local police unit. I suggest we remove this unreliable source, and find some better quality ones. Canadian Monkey (talk) 22:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You miss the point. If that source can't be trusted on easily verified, non-contentious claims (where is Israel's parliament, how many people were killed) - why should we trust it on this highly dubious extraordinary claim? Canadian Monkey (talk) 22:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be rather well known, there is even footage of it. Problem is, it's hard to find sources about it. Here's a picture:  But I agree, proper sources should be added.FunkMonk (talk) 22:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's well known, it should be easy to support it with reliable sources. Canadian Monkey (talk) 22:50, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just added one. For some reason, all the text only shows up in the cached version. And "well known" doesn't necessarily mean well known in the Anglosphere. FunkMonk (talk) 22:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

text: That may be your guess, but there are already several renowned journalists who back the Ehud Barak story: Robert Fisk, and here is an article from Andrew Lee Butters, from Time , so I think this is a very remarkable aspect of the story that should be mentioned. Let's put it back.Froy1100 (talk) 22:38, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reliability of sources

message: Already defunct. AnonMoos (talk) 22:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The edits you're referring to have already been removed. AnonMoos (talk) 08:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Google cache link

message: I have some concerns about the pic in the article. It represents her in a halo-like background as if she's some sort of angel. Although segments of Arab society view her in this light, she is seen by mainstream society as a despicable mass-murderer and per wp:npov, we should get a pic that is representative of the mainstream view. I'll remove this contentious pic pending a clear consensus to the contrary. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:55, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh??????? I think the picture of her looks absolutely horrible....far, faaaaaar too much makeup <shudders> (..not unlike the "ideal" in a few Arab countries, I´m afraid... never understood why some Arab first-ladies apply make-up as if they were porn-stars...<shudder again>). However, what *I* think is irrelevant; seriously; Brewcrewer; have you heard about WP:IDONTLIKEIT? If there are no copy-right-questions: the picture is in. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 01:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

text: If you are talking about the picture just below the Barak-picture (i.e while she was still alive): I agree: a *much* better picture (Jeez, I *hate* these pictures where women are hidden behind 150 ton of make-up, I really do). However, like you, I have no knowledge about copy-right.... If it can be uploaded, I would very much like to use it instead of the one presently in the article. (Possibly: cutting off the bottom half...the uniform is really not *that* interesting)  Cheers, Huldra (talk) 02:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am indeed talking about the second photo (the one below the one allegedly of Barak. Has it been twice today? Where was the first? Too bad our agreements can only come on such trivial issues. Breein1007 (talk) 02:17, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: . Ok; if the two of us agree: let us get/await someone with knowledge of copy-right -issues to (if possible) upload it. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 02:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think she looks kind of sexy in it despite the outdated fashion sense. However, it glorifying her could be a concern. Fair Use Rationales (especially an historic image that cannot be replaceable) often rely on significance. This image might even be considered iconic with it being used on banners and what not. It does present a potential POV issue. From poking around media related to the event, there are at least two other images that are just as iconic. There is the one of her dead and the one of her all dressed up to kill. Her being dead is why she is notable so it could be used. Same as her in her less than Western garb. All three could qualify for FURs. Unfortunately, that would be a lot of copyrighted images in an article. POV wise, they all say something different being the lead image. I think it should be replaced or another added. I thought it might be an easy way out to base it on MoS and not use images of her facing away from the text but that is two out of three of them.Cptnono (talk) 05:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pic 

message: Why have we brought up again the definition of the subject as terrorist? I thought that this issue had been made clear enough. As per WP:TERRORIST, it is clear that this definition has no place in Wikipedia. That Israel considers her a terrorist is clearly stated further below in the article. Militant is the term usually applied in these cases. Please check articles about other "terrorists". Let's not start this fight all over again, please.Froy1100 (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:TERRORIST does not say that we cannot use the term. One cautious way of doing it would be to spell it out as "she is a figure reviled in Israel as a terrorist" Cptnono (talk) 04:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

text: Given the sources I have seen (and I have seen many) OBL must be referred to as a terrorist, and generally has been in that article. There are some well-meaning people who know virtually nothing whatever of the subject occasionally revert. And the style guideline you reference admits of exceptions in any case. IronDuke 23:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but OBL was not referred as a terrorist, until you came along and introduced the word. "Terrorist" is per se a charged word that Wikipedia deliberately avoids, just like "freedom fighter", for the opposite reason. I guess your change will be reverted soon enough, you'll see (not by me). Please check that this is not necessarily an ideological matter. Other "terrorists" such as Samir Kuntar, Baruch Goldstein, Iñaki de Juana Chaos or Abimael Guzmán are also not referred as such either, even if there are enough references to do so.Froy1100 (talk) 08:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to apologize, just go back and reread my post. IronDuke 22:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorist. Again. 

message: I changed the subheading  "Veneration in Palestinian society":  to  "Legacy in Palestine", but another ed. changed it back. Headings are supposed to be as neutral as possible. Making judgements in headings is editorializing. She may well be venerated in Palestinian society, but it still doesn't belong in a heading. They are like article titles, and the rule follows WP:NDESC 
I notice another editor changed it, and you reverted that also. I'm changing it again. If it is reverted,  rather than continue this, I will take the next step., which is to bring it to the attention of the community at the NPOV noticeboard.  
It is not a question of whether sources support it. That applies only to the text. It is wrong to use this sort of judgmental term in a heading. We're an encyclopedia , and devoted to NPOV, and our headings like our page titles must show  absolute neutrality. It would be equally wrong whether one thinks her activities highly honourable, or the reverse.    DGG ( talk ) 17:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I garee with your changes but went further too. I've changed the heading to "Legacy" since Israeli and American reactions are included. I've edited down the text a bit, removing overquoting. I also removed the attribution to Palestinian Media Watch they are not an WP:RS). I'd prefer a replacement source be cited for the information but I believe its true so I retained it for now. Tiamuttalk 23:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: subheadings

message: re: my edit summary "report doesn't mention dalal so all this may be synth. added citation to at least support "beloved bride" statement which is apparently sourced from palwatch.org. suggest this material is discussed on talk".
This is the report that doesn't mention "beloved bride" etc or Mughrabi. The Their report Funding Hate Education concludes bit and the report should probably be removed to avoid synth. I added a citation to support the the case of a children's television program, in which Dalal Mughrabi was celebrated as the "beloved bride, daughter of Jaffa, jasmine flower." (from here) but as I said, this info appears to be sourced from palwatch.org. The "see for yourself watch the show here" link goes to palwatch's youtube channel.
All of this probably needs a bit of discussion. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: British Coalition against Hate Education

message: Editors involved with the Dalal Mughrabi page may wish to add a section on the recent White Hands Campaign controversy involving Dalal Mughrabi, or at least link to it in some form. Also, I would point out that there's a mistake in the first paragraph of the DM article: it should say "while in Israel *and elsewhere* she is a figure reviled as a terrorist." Explanation: see AJC article "AJC Calls on UN Population Fund to Dissociate from TV Campaign Glorifying Terrorist". The AJC is a US-based organization.—Biosketch (talk) 05:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  White Hands Campaign 

message: The photo is labelled by a source which is a blog and no longer exists. I doubt very much it is a correct photo. I suggest to remove it, unless independent confirmation found.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.88.109 (talk) 06:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the or at least a correct photo. See this NYT photo for example. There are many other examples that you can find yourself using google. Sean.hoyland - talk 06:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have to find anything "myself": I am pointing out that the source is unreliable. If you are happy with it, then <shrug> whatever. 71.146.88.109 (talk) 06:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  photo 

message: I see that Sean restored a blog into the article. Considering the reliability of this source was questioned, and that it contains what would be a BLP violation (which we discussed in the past) and that I suggested it be taken to RS/N before being re-introduced, I'd appreciate an explanation. Sean is the last person I'd need to remind these articles are under discretionary sanctions. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 18:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just trying to help. The Hebrew source needs a translation so I was trying to save someone the trouble. Sorry, I'm not aware of the background re. BLP vio. What is it ? Is the pertinent part of the translation okay ? If so, why not just paste the pertinent Hebrew and English into the ref and remove the blog ? Sean.hoyland - talk 19:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't do anything about it now because of 1RR. If you remove the blog I'll go over the translation. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 19:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Sean.hoyland - talk 19:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

text: Actually, that should be "to break out in a series of victory celebrations". No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 19:23, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume we only need enough to support what's in the Wiki article so I guess that's enough. Sean.hoyland - talk 19:29, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  blog 

message: It would be more accurate to specify that her father's family home was located in "Jaffa, Mandatory Palestine" instead of "Jaffa, Palestine." Leaving it as the latter conveys the false impressions that Palestine was a sovereign country (notably, the Wikipedia link that the word "Palestine" redirects to is also the article for "Mandatory Palestine"). Sammy1857 (talk) 19:48, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Father's family home 

message: "while in Israel and some other countries" must be changed to "while in Israel and other countries" Melvin toast (talk) 20:05, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 17:18, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 June 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dalal Mughrabi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100401022647/http://www.prio.no/upload/suicide_missions.pdf to http://www.prio.no/upload/suicide_missions.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: are you kidding?  "some" consider her  a terrorist-- she murdered 38 people!  do you have to get to 39 for wiki>? 104.129.196.99 (talk) 21:40, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  —  IVORK Discuss 02:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 February 2018 

message: According to formal palestinian sources, Dalal Mughrabi was born in 1958 and not in 1959. See [| Fateh web site] בן אביגדור (talk) 08:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year of birth 

message: Perhaps we should translitarate the Arab "غ" as "ġ" (i. e. not using a Greek "gamma", "ɣ"). Let us write Dalāl al-Muġrabī. 87.143.180.13 (talk) 10:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you trying to change the title of the article?  Anway, I don't know what dialect of Arabic uses that pronunciation.  "G" is actually a semi-marginal sound in Modern Standard Arabic, except in Egypt. AnonMoos (talk) 10:52, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "غ" and Arabic transliteration 

message: Change under "Commemoration as a martyr" from "Among Israelis, she is viewed as a terrorist responsible for the deadliest terrorist attack in the history of the State of Israel" to "Among Israelis, she is viewed as a terrorist responsible for the second deadliest terrorist attack in the history of the State of Israel" SKShoes (talk) 16:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. M.Bitton (talk) 17:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just updating for the fact that October 7th happened; I would support the change... AnonMoos (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 November 2023