Jump to content

Talk:Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleIsrael is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 8, 2008.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 16, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
May 25, 2007Good article nomineeListed
September 4, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
September 30, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
June 23, 2010Featured article reviewDemoted
April 20, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former featured article


Putting in American financial support for Israel in the very first paragraph of the lead

[edit]

Would it be appropriate to put in American financial backing for Israel over the years in the very first paragraph of the lead? I don't think so, but one user appeared to support the idea[1], so I thought to start a discussion. Pinging (RCSCott91SelfstudierABHammadEladkarmelCzelloGalamoreהאופה). VR (Please ping on reply) 17:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vice regent, no, I do not think so. The article is not about the United States, and such prominent characterizations of bilateral support or dependence are best reserved for historical polities where the book is closed and the motor of history has moved on. Remsense ‥  17:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My comment was tongue in cheek response. Selfstudier (talk) 17:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, WP:UNDUE. — Czello (music) 18:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that simply is not due. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course not, the US provides aid of all kinds to tens of countries. Israel is a US Ally and so get military aid just like many NATO countries Fyukfy5 (talk) 20:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fyukfy5: the point is that without the weapons sent by the US, Israel would probably have lost the war immediately (and there would probably have been fewer deaths). In my opinion, it's essential to include the information proposed by the OP; however, I will vote neither yes nor no. JacktheBrown (talk) 14:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the List of genocides: every state which has been accused of committing a genocide, the gencide it had been accused of committing is linked from that states wikipedia-article, with one exception: Israel.

Son course, I could have added "Israel has been accused of committing the Gaza genocide<refs>", but I suspect some of the "watchers" of this page might not like that. So, I want to hear first: what argument are there against it? cheers, Huldra (talk) 23:34, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if I don't hear any arguments against it in the next couple of days, I will add it, Huldra (talk) 23:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I haven't heard any protests, so I am adding it. Hope I don't end up like Hugh Despenser the Younger, Huldra (talk) 21:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You may not have heard anything because we've had this conversation before. Ideally, you should've done a cursory search of the archives before deciding you had implicit consensus for this. Remsense ‥  21:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Remsense: I did search for Gaza genocide in the archives, and got 0 hits.... Has there been a RfC about it? Huldra (talk) 22:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ideally you would provide a reason for your revert on the talk page. nableezy - 22:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
a link would have be nice.....Huldra (talk) 22:11, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Remsense: Second time: has there been a WP:RFC about it? If not, I might start one, Huldra (talk) 22:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was busy collecting the links below. I would support that, it seems of crucial importance. Remsense ‥  22:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I am not expressing my opinion on whether it should be included—I'm also going to be intellectually honest and express my opinion based on what I've read over the past year that it's all but certain to be DUE in the lead in the near future if it isn't already now—I am only pointing out that there is no consensus for it to the best of my understanding as an observer. See discussions within α93 § 2nd paragraph up to 1948 (continued), α102 § RFC on human rights language in lead, α107 § Lede summary proposal 2 that all indicate to me that this needs to be discussed beforehand at the very least. Remsense ‥  22:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, User:Remsense perhaps we should take this in 2 steps?
    • First: should a link to Gaza genocide be included in this article?
    • if yes: where should a link be included
And this is unlikely to go away anytime soon, Huldra (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably in the same place where we mention that a sitting PM is subject of an arrest warrant for using starvation as a weapon of war. Selfstudier (talk) 23:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 November 2024

[edit]

As of June 2024, the State of Israel is recognized as a sovereign state by 164 of the 192 member states of the United Nations. Northernheathen (talk) 19:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more specific, where are you proposing this text go? 331dot (talk) 23:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 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. M.Bitton (talk) 01:34, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

[edit]

Should the article Gaza genocide be linked from this article, and if yes, where?

Possible answers:
  • No, it should not be linked
  • Yes, it should be linked in the lead.
  • Yes, it should be linked from the body of the article (please specify which paragraph)

cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion (RfC)

[edit]
This doesn’t seem that actionable an RfC, or that productive a question. The content of the article is what is discussed, and links serve as navigational aids for delving into the content. Considering a link alone in the aether rather misses its purpose. CMD (talk) 09:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems that there should be first some material in the body related to the wikilink and South Africa's genocide case against Israel. @Huldra: Suggest you pull the RFC tag on this for now until some material can be put together for the article body. Selfstudier (talk) 11:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Something like this perhaps
Israel is accused of carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people by experts, governments, United Nations agencies, and non-governmental organisations during its invasion of the Gaza Strip in the ongoing Israel–Hamas war.[1][2] Observers, including the UN Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices and United Nations Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese,[3] have cited statements by senior Israeli officials that may indicate an "intent to destroy" (in whole or in part) Gaza's population, a necessary condition for the legal threshold of genocide to be met.[1][4][5] A majority of mostly US-based Middle East scholars believe Israel's actions in Gaza were intended to make it uninhabitable for Palestinians, and 75% of them say Israel's actions in Gaza constitute either genocide or "major war crimes akin to genocide".[6] On 29 December 2023, South Africa instituted proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice pursuant to the Genocide Convention,[7][8][9][10]
This is just wrt the genocide issue, need something about the arrest warrants as well. Selfstudier (talk) 15:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it should be linked in the lead and the body of the article, attached to content similar to that Selfstudier developed above, and content similar to that Huldra developed in [2] would serve well in the lede. It's obviously something readers are going to be coming to this page to learn more about, and the information exists on the encyclopedia, the conversations about whether it belongs here or not have laready been had, so there's no reason this page should not serve reader needs. — penultimate_supper 🚀 (talkcontribs) 21:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, adding content as Selfstudier's above, preferably at the end of the 21st century paragraph + add a single sentence to the end of lead like this, Huldra (talk) 22:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand why it would be necessary to add it as a completely separate paragraph (if we were to add it) instead of just putting at the end of the third paragraph, which is far more related, and less abrupt. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, adding content as Selfstudier's above, preferably at the end of the 21st century paragraph and add a single sentence to the end of lead per Huldra, but I would modify their suggested end-of-lead text ("In 2024, Israel was accused of committing the Gaza genocide)" to "In 2024, Israel was accused of committing genocide in Gaza" or similar. My logic for the change is that the accusation/dispute centres on whether Israel's actions in Gaza constitute genocide (or are legitimate self-defence/similar), rather than whether the 'Gaza genocide' is being committed by Israel (as opposed to some other State or body) which Huldra's text otherwise implies.Pincrete (talk) 07:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I agree with the inclusion in the lead. JacktheBrown (talk) 16:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes to Selfstudier's suggestion in the body per the weight of reliable sources given (I'll leave to others to determine where), with a summary in the lead. Only suggestion is to add the arrest warrants on. TarnishedPathtalk 09:29, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes it should be included in the lede and in the body text.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes similarly to how self has suggested DMH223344 (talk) 00:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Not until a new article about Palestine's genocide against Israel is linked to the Palestine article.[11]Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 01:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:OTHERCONTENT and then perhaps think about making a policy based argument or your !vote will likely be ignored by whoever closes this RFC. TarnishedPathtalk 02:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Given that there is no actual genocide. Very much not. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No The article "Gaza genocide" presents claims that lack broad consensus within the international community and are subject to significant dispute. Linking to such an article may mislead readers into perceiving these claims as established facts rather than contested allegations, thereby compromising the integrity of the host article. Eladkarmel (talk) 20:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No per MaskedSinger, Allthemilescombined1 and Eladkarmel; feels like including this would unduly shoehorn something in that doesn't belong in the general overview article. Andre🚐 21:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not in the lede. It should be made clear that these are accusations and many sources do not agree with this characterisation. Note that many country articles don't mention genocides in the lede even when there is a consensus that it happened (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq, Syria (Yazidi genocide), Uganda, etc). Alaexis¿question? 21:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. There's a relevant section where it can be mentioned: Israel#Israeli-occupied_territories. Right now, this article doesn't mention two important things: That the current Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, is a fugitive wanted for crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court, and that Israel is being charged with genocide by South Africa in the International Court of Justice. I think there can be a new subsection in the "Israeli occupied territories" section, that mentions both facts. I see Selfstudier has given a sample text. I support that paragraph being added to the relevant section, but I think a mention of the ICC's arrest warrant of the Prime Minister of Israel (and Yoav Gallant's warrant too) could also be added, since it's also international litigation for crimes against humanity in Gaza. Mohammed Deif's arrest warrant doesn't need to be mentioned in this article. I think we can have a new subsection titled "Gaza Strip" that moves text that already exists in the section. So in addition to Selfstudier's text, I would add the first sentence of the arrest warrant article to the end of it, and make it look like THIS (A link to a sandbox page that would show what the article would look like).--JasonMacker (talk) 05:43, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As far as adding it to the lead, the already existing sentence in the lead, "Israel's practices in its occupation of the Palestinian territories have drawn sustained international criticism—along with accusations that it has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Palestinian people—from human rights organizations and United Nations officials." seems to be a good enough summary, but I guess I would modify it to "Israel's practices in its occupation of the Palestinian territories have drawn sustained international criticism—along with accusations that it has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Palestinian people—from human rights organizations, the International Criminal Court, and United Nations officials." The ICC is technically not a UN body, so it should be mentioned separately. But other than that, I think such a sentence would be fine. I'm open to suggestions on this though. JasonMacker (talk) 05:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. The genocide allegation appears to be, at the moment, primarily a tool of propaganda. Unless substantial new evidence emerges, analyzed by impartial, non-politicized sources and supported by more than two vague statements and casualty figures (which include a significant number of Hamas militants but the Hamas-run Health Ministry prefers not to differentiate militants from civilians), such claims lack the rigor required for inclusion in serious, encyclopedic coverage. ABHammad (talk) 06:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "The genocide allegation appears to be, at the moment, primarily a tool of propaganda." This is simply not true. See: Expert opinions in the Gaza genocide debate. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 07:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. This article is about the State of Israel. Not news. Should the articles about the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and many others feature the various proven genocides that actually took place, or even in the lead? Might as well say "also known as the Z.E.", in the lead or anywhere, with some extra brackets for good measure? This is a matter of an ongoing armed conflict, with fog of war and disinformation throughout. Not only would it be "commenting on an ongoing investigation" as they say, but entirely inappropriate and irresponsible. Skullers (talk) 11:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes Per WP:LEDE, required mention of significant criticism or controversies, clearly true and which several of the No !votes have acknowledged as being the case. A mention should be added via inclusion within the sentence "Israel's practices in its occupation of the Palestinian territories have drawn sustained international criticism—along with accusations that it has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity [and genocide ] against the Palestinian people—from human rights organizations and United Nations officials." Selfstudier (talk) 12:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b "Gaza: UN experts call on international community to prevent genocide against the Palestinian people". OHCHR. 16 November 2023. Archived from the original on 24 December 2023. Retrieved 22 December 2023. Grave violations committed by Israel against Palestinians in the aftermath of 7 October, particularly in Gaza, point to a genocide in the making, UN experts said today. They illustrated evidence of increasing genocidal incitement, overt intent to "destroy the Palestinian people under occupation", loud calls for a 'second Nakba' in Gaza and the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory, and the use of powerful weaponry with inherently indiscriminate impacts, resulting in a colossal death toll and destruction of life-sustaining infrastructure.
  2. ^ Burga, Solcyré (13 November 2023). "Is What's Happening in Gaza a Genocide? Experts Weigh In". Time. Archived from the original on 25 November 2023. Retrieved 24 November 2023.; Corder, Mike (2 January 2024). "South Africa's genocide case against Israel sets up a high-stakes legal battle at the UN's top court". ABC News. Archived from the original on 7 January 2024. Retrieved 3 January 2024.;Quigley, John (3 July 2024). "The Lancet and Genocide By "Slow Death" in Gaza". Arab Center Washington DC. Archived from the original on 13 July 2024. Retrieved 13 July 2024.
  3. ^ Francesca Albanese (26 March 2024), Anatomy of a Genocide – Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, Francesca Albanese (PDF), Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Wikidata Q125152282, archived (PDF) from the original on 25 March 2024
  4. ^ Burga 2023; Soni, S. (December 2023). "Gaza and international law: The global obligation to protect life and health". South African Journal of Bioethics and Law. 16 (3): 80–81. doi:10.7196/SAJBL.2023.v16i3.1764.
  5. ^ "International Expert Statement on Israeli State Crime". statecrime.org. International State Crime Initiative. Archived from the original on 6 January 2024. Retrieved 4 January 2024.
  6. ^ Lynch, Marc; Telhami, Shibley (20 June 2024). "Gloom about the 'day after' the Gaza war pervasive among Mideast scholars". Brookings. Archived from the original on 26 June 2024. Retrieved 29 June 2024.
  7. ^ "South Africa launches case at top UN court accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza". Associated Press. December 29, 2023. Archived from the original on January 2, 2024. Retrieved January 5, 2024.
  8. ^ Rabin, Roni Caryn; Yazbek, Hiba; Fuller, Thomas (2024-01-11). "Israel Faces Accusation of Genocide as South Africa Brings Case to U.N. Court". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 13 January 2024. Retrieved 2024-01-13.
  9. ^ "Proceedings instituted by South Africa against the State of Israel on 29 December 2023" (PDF). International Court of Justice. December 29, 2023. Archived from the original on January 5, 2024. Retrieved January 5, 2024. ALT Link
  10. ^ "South Africa institutes proceedings against Israel and requests the International Court of Justice to indicate provisional measures" (Press release). The Hague, Netherlands: International Court of Justice. United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine. December 29, 2023. Archived from the original on January 5, 2024. Retrieved January 5, 2023.
  11. ^ "Situation in the State of Palestine: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I issues warrant of arrest for Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri (Deif)". International Criminal Court. 2024-11-21. Retrieved 2024-11-26.

Edit request

[edit]


  • What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}): In History, 21st century, please change
    A majority of mostly US-based Middle East scholars believe Israel's actions in Gaza were intended to make it uninhabitable for Palestinians, and 75% of them say Israel's actions in Gaza constitute either genocide or "major war crimes akin to genocide".
    +
    According to a recent Middle East Scholar Barometer poll of 758 mostly US-based Middle East scholars, a majority of those respondents believe Israel's actions in Gaza were intended to make it uninhabitable for Palestinians, and 75% of them say Israel's actions in Gaza constitute either genocide or "major war crimes akin to genocide".
    * Why it should be changed:The result of any one poll is probably undue for this section, but if it is to be included, it should be with proper context.
  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):[1]

Mikewem (talk) 18:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: neither an uncontroversial improvement, nor one that has consensus. M.Bitton (talk) 10:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tag

[edit]
Resolved

-tag removed !Moxy🍁 20:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


@Moxy: Reasons for the tag, please? Selfstudier (talk) 13:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing but military info looks like nothing but conflict for 20+ years ...this article is not History of the Israel Defense Forces. Need info like ..90s saw first featuring direct election of the prime minister etc. Moxy🍁 13:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You tag says undue not that the section needs updating, which material is undue? And why? Selfstudier (talk) 13:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
undue because its nothing but military history....no memtiom of any other history. Sounds like the most unstable country doing nothing but being at war. Moxy🍁 13:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
History on its own at 5116 words is half an article by itself. A lot is likely undue. CMD (talk) 13:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree so much details - over info that can be and is covred in sub articles that can be trimed like :The Jewish insurgency continued and peaked in July 1947, with a series of widespread guerrilla raids culminating in the Sergeants affair, in which the Irgun took two British sergeants hostage as attempted leverage against the planned execution of three Irgun operatives. After the executions were carried out, the Irgun killed the two British soldiers, hanged their bodies from trees, and left a booby trap at the scene which injured a British soldier. The incident caused widespread outrage in the UK" Moxy🍁 13:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The section that has been tagged is Israel#21st century, a short section, the material The Jewish insurgency continued and peaked... is not even in it, that material is in Israel#British_Mandate_for_Palestine section, which has not been tagged.
So did you mean to tag something else? Selfstudier (talk) 14:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moxy explained that subsection above, it is just one of a few with similar issues. CMD (talk) 16:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They haven't explained it, the material they quote is not tagged. Selfstudier (talk) 16:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I thought I was pretty clear.... the whole section is just about military.... in fact we have two paragraphs for something that's happening in the past year. What we are looking for is substantial historical significant information about the country's social and historic evolution in that time. Best we simply don't regurgitate American news headlines. For example should mention Disengagement Plan... What kind of social human rights progress has there been? In 20 years there must be some sort of legal process that has changed.... democratic decline perhaps? What has happened on the diplomatic front.... like the mass increase in foreign aid? Moxy🍁 20:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the whole section is just about military Which section? The only section that you tagged is the 21st Century section. If you meant to put the tag for the entire history section, then do that, I would also agree with that inline with multiple prior discussions asserting that it was way too long. Selfstudier (talk) 21:05, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which section? Not interested in some sort of gameplay. Your initial post was about a tag in a section this is the topic of the ongoing conversation..... with mention by another and myself about the excess detail overall in the history section with an example that I gave. You either agree it's excessive or you don't.... best course of action would be to come up with some sort of prose for the section.... and a better summary. Moxy🍁 21:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you don't want to admit you got this all backwards, fine by me, bfn. Selfstudier (talk) 23:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What you have to ask yourself is does your approach to this conversation help improve that article or not. There is clearly a problem all over the history section...but the info in this tagged section is the topic of conversation...do you have any input what can be done to help the section? Then perhaps we can move on to other sections. Moxy🍁 15:57, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I asked you what the problems were and your response was to quote something else from an untagged section, so if you can answer the original question that would be good. Selfstudier (talk) 16:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Best you let someone that is competent deal with the tag. My bad just frustrated that the post has not moved forward in actual improvements. Will address the problem with prose after the content addition dispute is over. Moxy🍁 18:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Couldn't agree more. Selfstudier (talk) 18:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What content addition dispute? Selfstudier (talk) 19:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was not aware of 'this'. Let's deal with the content issue after all the current concers. Last post from me here.Moxy🍁 20:01, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what that has to do with the issue you have been describing in this section.. OK, resolved for now. Selfstudier (talk) 20:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]