Talk:Hezbollah/Archive 13

message: I remember that we made this part a pressure release valve for the lead when this article was extremely  controversial and there was edit war in every case(Talk:Hezbollah/Archive lead#Introduction).  But ow disagreements has settled down so I propose merging it in the other sections to reduce the size of the article.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 06:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging Background

message: As you can see in Talk:Hezbollah/Archive_10#Category:Islamist_terrorism there wasn't any consensus to add this article to the category so I remove it until we reach consensus.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 06:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is up for discussion again, then I fully support the inclusion of this category.  Perhaps a new consensus can be formed in favor of the category.  --GHcool 17:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I still disagree with having this category. "A Category:Organisations that are believed to be terrorists by the U.S,UK,Western Europe and Bob would perhaps be silly, but more accurate" I find still to be valid. mceder (u t c) 19:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: this is a matter of definition. A terrorist organization is one that targets innocant civilians, something Hezbollah clearly does. Yahel Guhan 05:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And many people disagree with you, or agree with you but believe we should use the category on the Israel, United States and Denmark pages. mceder (u t c) 08:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Israel, US, and Denmark are not targeting innocant civilians, nor are they islamic, nor are they organizations. They are countries. Do you see the category on the Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, or Syria articles? Yahel Guhan 08:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Israel is certainly targetting innocent civilians, they are illegally occupying territories that do not belong to them, they are buldozing homes of people who have lived there for generations to build settlements. That violates even the most basic internatonal laws. Quite apart from the question if Israel has a right to hold on to the territories, the Geneva conventions clearly state that you cannot build on occupied territories unless you annex that territory. Israel, of course, will not annex the West Bank, as that would mean that the all the Palestinians would formally become Israeli citizens...  Count Iblis 13:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: no, Israel is targeting terrorists; so called "innocant" civilians just happen to get in the way of that. Yahel Guhan 23:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Hezbollah is an islamist organization. Their goal is to turn Lebanon into an Islamic state, which is done through terrorism. Thus they are an islamist terrorist organziation. If McVeigh's goal was to turn the U.S. into a Christian state, or if Christianity was his motive, it would be an example of christian terrorism. But since that wasn't his goal in his acts of terror, he is just a terrorist wothout religous motives. Same thing with your so-called "zionist terrorism." Religion was not a motive nor was it a goal. As further evidence that Hezbollah' motivations are Islam, read their manifisto: "We are the sons of the ummah (Muslim community) - the party of God (Hizb Allah) the vanguard of which was made victorious by God in Iran." Yahel Guhan 23:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Please don't retrieve the old discussion. Just say your idea about this issue.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 15:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Due to the fact that Hezbollah is in :Category:Organizations designated as terrorist and there is just six country designated it as terrorist organization I oppose adding Hezbollah in :Category:Islamist terrorism.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 15:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely. Saying that others call Hezbollah as terrorist is much more NPOV than saying Hezbollah is terrorist.Bless sins 23:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not every country has to make a stance. A category shows association. Since there is association between islamist terrorism and Hezbollah, the category belongs. Besides, dispite the heavy amount of evidence claiming they are terrorists, is there any evidence denying this fact? Yahel Guhan 23:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a question of NPOV. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. We have already accounted for allegations of terrorism against Hezbollah. The category is quite unnecessary and POV.Bless sins 23:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You haven't provided any reliable sources that present the arguement that it isn't a terrorist organization. Plenty have been provided to say it is. Because there is at least a relationship between terrorism and Hezbollah, the category belongs. Yahel Guhan 02:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the article, most of the Arab and Muslim worlds don't consider Hezbollah as "terrorist".Bless sins 17:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: and that is all who don't. thus it is a minority view. Yahel Guhan 18:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:CAT states the following as the rules to adding categories:
bQuestions to ask to determine whether it is appropriate to add an article to a category:
If the category does not already exist, is it possible to write a few paragraphs or more on the subject of the category, explaining it? 
If you go to the article from the category, will it be obvious why the article was put in the category? Is the category subject prominently discussed in the article? 
Does the category fit into the overall category system? Categories that don't fit are often deleted. To familiarize yourself with the types of categories that routinely get deleted read Wikipedia:Overcategorization. 
Question 1 is irrelevant. Question 2, the answer is a clear yes. There are enough reliable sources to make it clear why this article is in that category. It is no minority view that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. Question 3, the answer is yes; it does fit into the overall categorization system. Yahel Guhan 18:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Yahel - You say "It is no minority view that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization". I worked myself on this section in the article. There are a lot of other countries in the world who either does not have a list of who they consider terrorists, or they do and left Hezbollah of it. I could only find support for a handfull of countries who states they are terrorists. I lived in the U.S for many years and I do know that in the surroundings I was at, most people either did not know who Hezbollah was, or thought they were part of Al-Quaida. We can safely(?) assume that a majority in Israel considers them terrorists? But we are fart short of a worldview that Hezbollah are terrorists. mceder (u t c) 20:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the opinion of "a lot of other countries in the world" or "a worldview" opinion were the criteria, we would add to the evolution article.  We don't because the Wikipedia is written with facts taken from informed and educated sources, not "the masses." --GHcool 00:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was responding to Yahels statement that assumed a majority believes Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. I was not discussing criteria for WP:V. I know Wikipedia is written with facts from sources, and that the point is Verifiability and not Truth. mceder (u t c) 05:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pick any definition of terrorism you want and I can find reliable sources to verify that Hezbollah practices (or at least practiced) terrorism under that definition.  --GHcool 05:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's okay. I really do not think it will lead towards something productive. mceder (u t c) 11:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you admitting your argument is a weak one or are you not accepting the challenge of the argument? Forfeit and you retain the respect of your peers, but lose your preferred status of the article.  Discontinue the conversation and you retain the preferred status of the article, but lose the respect of your peers.  If I were you, I would choose to forfeit because the respect of my peers is more important to me than this or any other article.  We await your decision.  --GHcool 19:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is getting silly. Dude, this is not a duel. I could give a flip about what you consider the respect of your peers, I am here to work on articles. The majority of work I have done with this article is very very dull reference work, formatting and applying templates. If you disagree with me on this category, I am happy. I would even recommend that you go ahead and add the category back in the article - you seem certain on your case, you state you can produce reliable sources for it - then go for it! "We await your decision"! mceder (u t c) 20:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the category.  Thank you for your support.  You might not care about the respect of your peers, but perhaps you can find some satisfaction in knowing that you have my respect.  --GHcool 22:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And I have removed it. :Category:Organizations designated as terrorist sufficiently and neutrally covers the fact that some consider the organization to be terrorist in nature. Tarc 13:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The Accusation: "there hasn't been a single terror attack that has been proven to be perpetrated by Hezbollah." - Count Iblis.  02:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The Reality: The 2006 Lebanon War started on July 12, 2006, when Hezbollah terrorists on Lebanese soil launched Katyusha rockets at Israeli civilian border towns, killing eight Israeli soldiers and wounding five Israeli civilians.  Click here for the international condemnation Hezbollah received for deliberately targetting Israeli civilians and Israeli civilian areas despite their notable absense of military infrastructure.  I urge Count Iblis not to write lies anymore that are so easy to prove their falsehood.  --GHcool 04:51, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Attacking civilian targets falls under the category of using excessive force, war crimes etc. not terrorism. E.g., I have yet to read a single history book that says that the bombing of Dresden was an act of terrorism. Also, ICBMs were aimed at Soviet and US cities until about 1990. However, I cannot find a single source that says that WWIII would have been an act of terrorism. Count Iblis 13:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: You misunderstood. Some countries consider Hezbollah as a terrorist organization while some others don't do so. Even some others especially Mulim countries recognized it as a liberation movement and there  are reliable source for all of these position in the article. Now we should decide in which category put it and it depends on our consensus. At present four wikipedians oppose adding Category:Islamist terrorism while two other support this idea. So there isn't any consensus. Please be patint and don't push your POV.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 02:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why this is controversial.  Hezbollah's self-stated purpose is to destroy Israel.  It stirs up hatred of Judaism, Jews, and those who associate with them.  It has no problem attacking civilians or using them as shields or pawns.  Its modus operandi is to create fear.  Can you justify all this?  Frotz 07:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The category is controversial, no doubt. See the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_12#Category:Islam_and_antisemitism. mceder (u t c) 17:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hezbollah's self-stated purpose is to destroy Israel. It stirs up hatred of Judaism, Jews, and those who associate with them. Thus we've put Hezbollah in :Category:Islam and antisemitism and :Category:Anti-Zionism. But the other claims are controversial. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 17:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While Hezbollah certainly qualifies the "Islamic" part, it needs to be explained how it qualifies the "antisemitic" part. Please note that Hezbollah denies discriminating or stirring hatred against Jews, and claims to distinguish between Israel and Jews.Bless sins 17:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wanting Israel wiped off the map is antisemitic. read their position on Jews and judaism- that should clarify its stance on antisemitism. Yahel Guhan 18:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. They just want a one a state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian question. There is nothing anti-semitic about that. Count Iblis 02:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where the palestinians rule with islamic law, and the jews are subjugated. A very antisemitic idealology. Yahel Guhan 17:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Again: Category:Islamist terrorism

message: Bless sins, please explain why you removed this cat. Yahel Guhan 02:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You misunderstood. Some countries consider Hezbollah as a terrorist organization while some others don't do so. Even some others especially Mulim countries recognized it as a liberation movement and there  are reliable source for all of these position in the article. Now we should decide in which category put it and it depends on our consensus. At present four wikipedians oppose adding Category:Islamist terrorism while two other support this idea. So there isn't any consensus. Please be patint and don't push your POV.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 02:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why this is controversial.  Hezbollah's self-stated purpose is to destroy Israel.  It stirs up hatred of Judaism, Jews, and those who associate with them.  It has no problem attacking civilians or using them as shields or pawns.  Its modus operandi is to create fear.  Can you justify all this?  Frotz 07:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The category is controversial, no doubt. See the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_12#Category:Islam_and_antisemitism. mceder (u t c) 17:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hezbollah's self-stated purpose is to destroy Israel. It stirs up hatred of Judaism, Jews, and those who associate with them. Thus we've put Hezbollah in :Category:Islam and antisemitism and :Category:Anti-Zionism. But the other claims are controversial. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 17:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While Hezbollah certainly qualifies the "Islamic" part, it needs to be explained how it qualifies the "antisemitic" part. Please note that Hezbollah denies discriminating or stirring hatred against Jews, and claims to distinguish between Israel and Jews.Bless sins 17:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wanting Israel wiped off the map is antisemitic. read their position on Jews and judaism- that should clarify its stance on antisemitism. Yahel Guhan 18:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. They just want a one a state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian question. There is nothing anti-semitic about that. Count Iblis 02:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where the palestinians rule with islamic law, and the jews are subjugated. A very antisemitic idealology. Yahel Guhan 17:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Islam and antisemitism]]

message: This article is currently 101 kb long.  I some trims here and there would probably help.  I propose the following could be trimmed:
*The "History" section and "Background" section seem a little redundant.  I propose deleting the "History" section and adding a link to the History of Hezbollah article in the "Background" section.
*The entire "Ideology" section can and should be merged with the article titled Hezbollah Ideology.  A short summary of and a link to that article should be included here.
*The paragraph about the Netherlands' history of classification of Hezbollah as a terrorist group.  ("In the past, the Netherlands had only considered ...")
*I've also made minor trims to various sections that I don't think anybody will object to, most of which are redundant with the information preceding it.
--GHcool 18:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with all suggestions. Also note that the size of the article that counts(i.e excluding wiki markup, references, see alsos, lists etc etc) is about 90kb. The wordcount is right around 7,000 words. mceder (u t c) 19:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK.  I will make the above changes over the weekend then.  --GHcool 00:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Now the article is 92kb. Please move whatever has been removed from this article to the sub-articles.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 16:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: #I removed some quotations which were duplicated and added some more important information. This information may relate to political activities section. What's your idea? --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 04:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: # I also moved the last paragraph to Attacks on Israel--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 04:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the "too long" template. The article has shortened recently and now it's 92 kb.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 05:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trimming