Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  Main   Talk Page   Help   Participants   Awards   Article Assessment   Templates   To do   New Articles   Sister Projects  
This Talk page is dedicated to matters related to WikiProject Israel.
WikiProject Israel (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Can you take a look[edit]

I received a warning from Palestinian editors for editing the article "History of the name Palestine" After posting the section listed bellow I received this "official warning" How I can protect my rights or contact the arbitration?

"==Etymology== The name Palestine refers to a region of the eastern Mediterranean coast from the sea to the Jordan valley and from the southern Negev desert to the Galilee lake region in the north. The word itself derives from “Plesheth”, a name that appears frequently in the Bible and has come into English as “Philistine”. Plesheth, (root palash) was a general term meaning rolling or migratory. This referred to the Philistine’s invasion and conquest of the coast from the sea. The Philistines were not Arabs nor even Semites, they were most closely related to the Greeks originating from Asia Minor and Greek localities.The name of the Philistines in their own language is not known; however, the Bible also relates them as the people of "Kaftor" (כפתור in Hebrew, see for example the Book of Jeremiah Chapter 47, Verse 4). "Kaftor" is not of Hebrew or Semitic origin, which supports the possibility that this word is similar to the name they called themselves.[1]" Thanks

Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel,[edit]

The web-site for Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel,, seem not to have been working for the last few days (It was ok up until a week ago). Does anyone know what has happend? Cheers, Huldra (talk)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion[edit]

Israeli location map incident[edit]

An incident occurred recently at template:Location map Israel, when user Sepsis II modified a long-standing version of Israeli map into "1949 borders" version without any discussion, suspiciously naming it File:Neutral Israel location map.svg instead of File:Israel location map.svg. Further, upon resulting edit-warring, an administrator protected that template, but perhaps mistakenly, without restoring the stable version prior to Sepsis II edits. Interestingly, there has already been a comprehensive discussion at Module_talk:Location_map/data/Syria, with an accepted solution regarding Syrian and Israeli map issues, but some editors apparently fail to acknowledge it. An administrator raised the issue at ANI, but there was not attention. There is a discussion going on to return to previous status quo before alleged system gaming by Sepsis II, but the undiscussed change shouldn't have happened in the first place. I invite editors to discuss the incident at ANI thread.GreyShark (dibra) 18:36, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

I had no time to address this (or indeed anything else on Wikipedia), but this is causing me great distress as well, not because the colors are different (not as important), but because of the removal of all the detailed maps in favor of one uniform map. This should be reverted, but there was little interest in the WP:AN thread. Is there an ongoing discussion somewhere that I am missing? If so please let me know. —Ynhockey (Talk) 10:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Just to give the reason why others are distressed with the original maps. Presenting non-Israeli territory (that is under Israeli military occupation) as Israeli territory, either by colour scheme or through international boundaries is a gross WP:NPOV violation. I agree that the ideal solution is to create detailed neutral maps that do not present non-Israeli territory as Israeli. In the meantime however reverting to the maps that are totally inconsistent with RS is not an viable option. Dlv999 (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I asked Ynhockey to remake the zoomed in maps with EJ outside of Israel but he refused. Until we can find a map creator, we will have to make due with what acceptable maps are available. Sepsis II (talk) 17:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

AfC submission - 22/05[edit]

Draft:Yitzhak Yaakov Yellin. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gil Sheffer[edit]

Dear Israel experts: Here's an old abandoned AfC submission that will soon be deleted as a stale draft unless someone takes an interest in it. Is this a notable person, and should it be kept and improved instead? —Anne Delong (talk) 13:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't think so. He's a civil servant. Number 57 13:52, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Infobox Israel municipality[edit]

I've noticed the |distict field doesn't recognize central but rather center. Seeing as the correct name for the district is Central District, with the article at Central District (Israel), is there any way this can be changed? Zarcadia (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I've fixed it (and the links displayed by entering "Center"). The issue arose because the article was moved a few years ago without many people noticing. It's a bit odd, because "Center District" is the correct translation, but the commonly-used name is indeed "Central". Number 57 16:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Great, thanks for your speedy reply and resolution! Zarcadia (talk) 16:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Category:Moroccan Jews[edit]

Bigdoul and I have had a disagreement over whether Yoram Marciano should be in Category:Moroccan Jews. Marciano was born in Israel to a family of Moroccan emigrants, and is already in Category:Israeli people of Moroccan-Jewish descent. Bigdoul thinks that Marciano should be the Moroccan Jews category as well, claiming that being of Moroccan Jewish descent makes him a Moroccan Jew. I disagree, and think that the Moroccan Jews category is only for Jews who were born or lived in Morocco, and that the current categorisation is what is appropriate. Opinions please! Thanks, Number 57 21:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


Indeed, Moroccan Jew is an ethnicity. The Moroccan Jews are the Jews who lived or who recent ancestors lived in Morocco. Moroccans have their own culture, their own tradition, their own ritual, lithurgical system. It's not because they are born somewhere else that they are not Moroccan anymore. Moroccan is not just a citizenship, it's an actual ethnicity, with all its cultural package. To categorize all the Moroccan Jews in the same category, it's useful because it shows in one click all the Moroccan Jewish diaspora.

Bigdoul (talk)

Category:Israeli people of Moroccan-Jewish descent is a sub-category of the main one though.

Number 57 08:03, 30 May 2014 (UTC)


Number 57, you are absolutely right. bigdoul claim is false. "...or who recent ancestors lived in Morocco...", this claim was made up by the user himself, without any sources to support it. Moroccan Jews do not share all the cultural elements the Moroccan Arabs preserve, and Israeli "Moroccans" do not share NONE of them. Moroccan Jews is not an ethnicity, Jews are the ethnicity. I have also had issues with bigdoul, the user ignored my massage and explanations and have proceeded with the false editing. I think the user is deserved to be reported. Infantom (talk) 08:51, 30 May 2014 (UTC)


Israeli "Moroccan" share NONE of them? What about Mimouna? What about Arabic language? What about Hennah? What about Moroccan music? What about Moroccan food? What about Hiloulot? You speak out of ignorance. Moroccan Jewish culture is a very specific ethnicity with a very specific culture, it has nothing to do with Arabs, it's a subgenre of Moroccan culture. Your explanation are baseless. Basically you deny 2400 years of history. Miri Bohadana, Yoram Marciano and Orit Shitrit are Moroccan Jews, children of Moroccan Jews. It's a matter of ethnicity, not of citizenship (beside as sons of Moroccans, they are entitled to Moroccan citizenship automatically). You can report me I don't mind.

Bigdoul (talk) 13:25, 30 May 2014 (UTC) ---

Yes, Israeli "Moroccan" share NONE of them. You have no idea what you are taking about. I provided you well sourced articles about Jews and ethnicity but you decided to ignore them, probably out of national pride. Israeli "Moroccan" language is not Arabic but Hebrew. Mimouna is a north African Jewish holiday and has nothing to do with other North African people or Arab Moroccans. Hilula is a general religious Jewish habit and has nothing to do with Morocco. Hena(Hina) is a general middle eastern ritual shared by many other non Moroccan people. Jewish "Moroccan" food is also shared by other north African Jewish communities and most of it is unique to them and not shared by other north African people. nowadays Moroccan music is barely part of their culture and Israeli oriental music is not "Moroccan music".

" It's a matter of ethnicity "- yes, but Moroccan Jewry isn't an ethnicity but a Jewish community of the Jewish people. Their ethnicity is Jewish. After we'll reach a consensus you will be reported. Infantom (talk) 12:12, 30 May 2014 (UTC) ---

What articles did you give me? Beside recklessly removing my contribution, what else did you do ? There is no national pride whatsoever, you are the one who is being obnoxious about it. I am sorry but saying that Israeli Moroccan don't speak Arabic is stupid. Watch movies from Ronit Elkabetz or Hana Azoulay Hasfari if you want to make a point. Mimouna is a Moroccan Jewish party after Pessah, and it spread amongst other North African Jews. Basically what you are doing is merely an attempt to destroy an identity and a cultural background. Moroccan Jews and Moroccan Muslims share the same culture, with each group having specific things related to their faith. But Moroccan Jews are an actual ethnicity (group of people belonging to the same cultural group), in certain communities they don't even mix with Jews from other countries, not even Algerians or Tunisians. You can play the Jewish hegemony all you want; but you won't change the fact that they are a group of their own. And telling me that I don't know what I am talking about is stupid. I am Moroccan and I have many relatives in Israel. So report, you wont change that fact.

Bigdoul (talk) 14:59, 30 May 2014

I provided 3 well sourced articles: Jews, ethnic group and ethnoreligious group. In addition, i contradicted all the examples you listed (you decided to ignore most of them). Unlike you that just keep reciting the same arguments, up to now you haven't provided even a single source to support your claims. "I am sorry but saying that Israeli Moroccan don't speak Arabic is stupid." - Please prove it (and not just the elders). "Watch movies from Ronit Elkabetz or Hana Azoulay Hasfari if you want to make a point "- It doesn't prove anything, The vast majority of Israeli "Moroccans" do not speak Arabic, that's a fact. and "Moroccan Jew" doesn't fit the definition of ethnicity that's a community. Infantom (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Comment - Moroccan Jew is of course an ethnicity, but since Marciano is a living human being it is up to him to define his identity rather than Wikipedia editors defining it for him. Israeli people of Moroccan-Jewish descent is a factual, accurate and uncontroversial category. Whether Marciano is a Moroccan Jew is up to him. If he has described himself as a Moroccan Jew in an interview, fine, if not, that identity can't be imposed on him. There is no point discussing this further without evidence that Marciano self-identifies as a Moroccan Jew. Sean.hoyland - talk 19:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Why? It's ethnicity. If it were that he has AIDs, or VD, or any of the age-long "slander" categories it would be enough for an RS to have supported it. Why, then, for ethnicity should more be required? Plus, if his parents are alive, and ethnicity descends from them, there's no difference. I don't have a !vote on the general issue, but this seems incorrect as a "reason." Epeefleche (talk) 20:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Jewish is an ethnicity, Moroccan is not - Morocco is a country shared by several different ethnic groups, and there is no Moroccan one. To me it's fairly obvious that any [country name]+Jews category is specifically about nationality, not ethnicity, and as Marciano does not have Moroccan citizenship, he is not Moroccan. Number 57 21:18, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Moroccan Jews is not an ethnicity. They share more ethnic and cultural elements with other Jewish communities. The issue here is "Moroccan Jews" in Israel, and they are definitely not part of that definition. Infantom (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
  • @Epeefleche - Why ? Because in this case an RS that described him as a Moroccan Jew would, I think, be wrong, at least according to a straightforward reading of the meaning of the term. As far as I can tell, an editor wants to assign membership of an ethnic group via the category Moroccan Jew, to a living person when that membership is at odds with a straightforward reading of the meaning of the category name and without sources. In the unlikely but not impossible event that Marciano has self-identified somewhere as a Moroccan Jew (among other identities he may assign to himself) despite not being Moroccan, I think that categorization would be consistent with policy. But without self-identification it looks like miscategorization.
  • @Number 57, perhaps we are using words in different ways. I am using ethnicity and ethnic group interchangably and treating Moroccan Jews as a distinct ethnic group. I agree that any [country name]+Jews category is probably meant to be about nationality but that doesn't appear to be how the category is being used in all cases and the category description does not describe the inclusion criteria/decision procedure.
Sean.hoyland - talk 17:41, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

@Infantom In that case, what about the article Yemenite Jews, that wasn't written by me, and that says exactly the same thing? Why Ofra Haza, Boaz Mauda and many others Israeli-born are classified as Yemenite Jews? I am sorry my friend but the Moroccan Jews are an actual ethnicity, and to say that they share more in common with other Jews is no-sense, and completely false. You don't know what you are talking about. The only thing that Moroccan Jews share with other Jewish communities is the religion. Their food, culture, tradition, clothing, wedding ceremony, etc.. are exactly the same than their Muslim counterparts (Moroccan culture). To say Moroccan is not an ethnicity, then you should check the article Moroccan people on Wikipedia. Moroccan people is composed by many elements (Arabs, Berbers, Moors, Moroccan Jews), but they are all from one people. And as a matter of fact, Israeli of Moroccan descent are reported and considered in Morocco as a part of the Moroccan diaspora. Besides who told you Marciano does not have a Moroccan citizenship? Moroccans as subject of the King have automatically the Moroccan citizenship, and it's automatically passed to their kids. It's clear that you are using his ideology to counter my claim, but he does not know anything about Morocco, neither Moroccan Jews. Moroccan is not just a citizenship and a passport. It's where these Jews lived for over 2000 years and were literally shaped by the country. Please reconsider my change. Kind regards

Bigdoul (talk) 06:23, 1 June 2014

Exactly what i suspected, you don't even recognize Jews as a people and you are demonstrating, once again, your lack of knowledge about the Jews and their communities around the world. Jews are not just a religion. The Jewish people are a nation and ethnoreligious group, and all Jewish communities share in common ethnic and cultural elements as culture: Jewish culture, religion: Judaism, Jewish atheism; language: Hebrew and more Jewish languages; homeland: Land of Israel; ancestors: Israelites; history: Jewish history; literature: Jewish literature, Hebrew literature; poetry: Hebrew poetry; mythology: Jewish mythology; folklore: Jewish folklore; cuisine: Jewish cuisine; music: Jewish music. Jews can be also referred as a civilization. True, Moroccan Jews have more specific cultural characteristics as any other Jewish community around the world, but it doesn't make them an ethnic group of their own. Please read also Ethnic groups in West Asia. Read all the articles i gave you if you really want to learn and understand why you are wrong. Now, don't forget that the topic is about Israeli "Moroccans", they are very far away from being "Moroccan" and i have already gave you examples for that. As for the Yemenite Jews article - it's also inaccurate. ofra haza and the rest are descendants of the Jewish community of Yemen, that's why the "Israeli people of Moroccan-Jewish descent" category is legitimate, i think it is more accurate. Your citizenship granting claim is also irrelevant, otherwise we should classify all the Jews in the world as "Israelis". As for Marciano, it's irrelevant to me, i didn't say anything specific about him. Best regards Infantom (talk) 19:22, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I am sorry, but since it does not cause an issue for the Yemenite Jews, I don't see why it would be an issue for Moroccan Jews. Moroccan Jews share culture, origins, rituals specific to them. They are a part of the greater Jewish people, but they also are an ethnic component of Morocco, as well as officially a part of Moroccan diaspora. You are not Moroccan, you obviously lack information and knowledge about how Judaism is related to this country, neither do you know the specificity of the Moroccan people. I don't want to argue your arguments, because they are pointless. Saying that Jews share a "Jewish cuisine" is silly. The only common ground is that the food is kosher, but they don't have the same culinary tradition at all, not the same spices, nothing in common. An Ethnicity is a group (and I am quoting the Oxford dictionary : "The fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition". So Jewish is an ethnicity, so can be Moroccan, so can be Moroccan Jews. So please stop removing my comments. Categorizing Marciano as "Moroccan Jews" alongside all the people of Moroccan Jewish descent is a way to see in one click all the members of the Moroccan Jewish diaspora around the world. Thanks

Bigdoul (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2014

Well, we made a little progress. After demonstrating you don't even know what is a Jew, you now see them as a people. Your claim is so weak that from all ethnic elements(over 10!) i presented you rely on "Jewish cuisine" because they don't share an absolute "common ground". It's ridiculous. Moroccan Jews cultural characteristics are to minor to be considered as an ethnicity. You don't want to argue my arguments because you have nothing to say, you just keep reciting the same invalid claims over and over again. Your "origin" claim is also ignorant; There are Algerian Jewish families, Turkish Jewish families and even Dutch Jews(!), read here, that shared the same origin as many other Moroccan Jews before the Alhambra Decree. I have countered all your arguments with well sourced articles and examples. It seems you didn't even bother to read them. Take another example from the Iraqi Jews and Algerian Jews articles and see how it should be written. I don't really see any reason to continue this with you, and i don't have to be Moroccan in order to know that Israeli "Moroccans" are far away from being Moroccans. Keep in mind this is an open discussion and i'm not the only one that oppose your edits. Please don't edit on that topic until you reach a consensus(you've already been warned for that and not by me...). Thanks and best regards --23:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)Infantom (talk)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014[edit]

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in Asia may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer (Talk) 21:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Yediot Aharonot archives help[edit]

Is anyone interested in searching the archives of the Yediot Aharonot for the original Hebrew story about Yanis Kanidis/John Kanidis/Ivan Kanidis? See what I posted here: Talk:Yanis_Kanidis#Yediot_Aharonot_story - The authors are Dimitri Prokopiev and Natasha Mozgobia WhisperToMe (talk) 05:18, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

1920s image set from Jerusalem, categorizing needed[edit]

Hi, I have uploaded some Jerusalem-themed postcard scans that I made, along with online sourced pictures for the missing parts of the set. At the moment, they aren't very categorized and they have not yet been integrated into Wikipedia articles. Here's the link, if anyone is interested in doing something with the material:

Expert opinion in Late Ottoman History needed[edit]

Hello, there's an ongoing debate concerning moving the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem article to "Sanjak of Jerusalem". Your input can help resolve the debate, thank you. -Elias Z 06:03, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


The Israel Portal is currently without a quote. Is anyone interested in maintaining Portal:Israel/Quotes? -- John of Reading (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd be interested in doing it. Is there a procedure? --GHcool (talk) 18:26, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Not really. There's an archive page at Portal:Israel/Quotes Archive, but the instructions there haven't been followed for years. I suggest you choose a quote, stick it on the page with its source, and keep the page on your watchlist. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Isreal At Wikimania 2014[edit]

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

All, please see here for a proposed leaflet advertising WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration at wikimania 2014. Oncenawhile (talk) 20:54, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SHIM[edit]

Hello, Israel experts. This old AfC submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. I am unable to evaluate the references. Is this a notable person? Should the article be kept and improved? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Ludwig Blum[edit]

Hello. Is anyone able to find a photograph of Ludwig Blum in the public domain please? It would be wonderful to add it to his infobox. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Deletions of ynet poll result from over 150 Israeli articles[edit]

Zero0000 (whom I invite to join in this conversation) has just now deleted text from over 150 articles of Israelis.

The text in each case mentions the individual that is the subject of the article having been voted one of the greatest Israelis in a poll of the Israeli public by Ynet. An example is here.

The reason given by Zero was: "rm non-notable (poll not published in secondary sources), not encyclopaedic and flawed (not randomly sampled). See WP:Articles for deletion/200 Greatest Israelis and WP:Articles for deletion/200 greatest Israelis".

I think that, at the very least, each individual entry regarding this poll -- by a high-level RS -- is appropriate to reflect. And that the deletions were therefore not appropriate.

At the (curious) AfD 200 Greatest Israelis, there was confusion (by non-lawyers, I would guess, who were not familiar with Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Co.) as to whether reflecting the entire list as a list might raise a copyvio issue. And some !votes were based on that. That's certainly a non-issue here, as in each article there was only one entry reflected, not the entire list.

As to Zero's assertion that the quality of the poll is low in his view, I would point to the comment of DGG in the Afd: "... some of the comments above are saying we shouldn't cover this because the quality of the poll is low. This is a non-reason. We do not decide to write articles on things based on our decision about the intrinsic quality--it would certainly make some interesting but interminable debates on musicians and some similar topics." And in closing the AfD Beeblebrox wrote: "... arguments about the methodology or the quality of the poll are, as was rightly pointed out, not relevant." Yet Zero deleted the text in question using that very assertion as a basis for his deletions.

The further background to this is that not only do other similar polls have mentions -- they (in the case of countries other than Israel) have entire articles devoted to reflecting the results of media polls (either TV or print media).

And all have the same precise focus -- each is a poll of the "best" from country x. Most were apparently spurred by the British poll, in 2002.

See: Argentina: El Gen Argentino • Belgium: Belg der Belgen / De Grootste Belg / Le plus grand Belge • Bulgaria: Velikite Balgari • Canada: The Greatest Canadian • Chile: Greatest Chilean • Croatia: Greatest Croatian • Czech Republic: Největší Čech • Finland: Suuret suomalaiset • France: Le Plus Grand Français • Germany: Unsere Besten • Greece: Great Greeks • Ireland: Ireland's Greatest • Italy: Il più grande italiano di tutti i tempi • Japan: The Top 100 Historical Persons in Japan • Netherlands: De Grootste Nederlander • New Zealand: New Zealand's Top 100 History Makers • Portugal: Os Grandes Portugueses • Romania: Mari Români • Russia: Imya Rossiya • South Africa: Great South Africans • Spain: El Español de la Historia • Ukraine: The Greatest Ukrainians • United Kingdom: 100 Greatest Britons • USA: The Greatest American.

And "otherstuffexists" allows us to look at such similar lists, as long as -- as is the case here -- that is not the only argument for keeping the text.

I would urge restoration of the text.Epeefleche (talk) 05:11, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The reasons why I started deleting the ranking from the 200 biographies, and why Zero0000 joined me are detailed in Epeefleche's talk page
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/200 Greatest Israelis closed without any regard to WP:COPYVIO. This is a non-issue.
The above lists of articles on similar polls appear to be articles about television shows, not about online surveys. The notability of television shows is different from the notability of online surveys.
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a very weak argument.
Yonideworst (talk) 12:02, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh -- I now see that Yonideworst tag-teamed the deletions with Zero, of the same text and with the same reasons ... but in different articles. I've asked Yonideworst twice whether he has edited before, either as an IP or with a username, as his style of editing seems familiar -- and his editing is astoundingly impressive (or DUCKish) if he is indeed an editor with fewer than 300 edits. Another seasoned editor has made the same request. Yonideworst has failed to respond.
The above lists of articles re similar polls are all about parallel media surveys. There is no real-world distinction.
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS itself states: "While these comparisons are not a conclusive test, they may form part of a cogent argument; an entire comment should not be dismissed because it includes a comparative statement like this."Epeefleche (talk) 00:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
There are two separate issues being confused here. One is about the article on the Ynet poll, and the other is about the use of the poll results in articles about people. They are quite separate issues. About the article on the poll: I didn't even know about the AfD while it was open but would have voted only with reference to notability and coverage by secondary sources. Issues like scientific validity are irrelevant to articles on popular culture. The TV shows in Epeefleche's list are somewhat analogous to the Ynet poll article, but that article was deleted after the AfD debate and the correct way to continue the debate is Deletion Review.
My only concern here is the use of the poll results in articles about people. In this instance we need to consider if being ranked in the Ynet poll has significance and notability for a person important enough to have a Wikipedia article. My opinion is that it is a matter of profound triviality. Consider "Leah was voted the 152nd-greatest Israeli of all time". All that happened was that the newspaper listed Leah on their web page and some tiny tiny number of visitors to the page chose her as one of the 3 greatest Israelis of all time. A few votes from her family and friends would have been enough to get position 152 out of the 200 that were listed. This is worthy of being in an encyclopaedia article? The deletion of the article on the poll makes it hard to argue that the poll was itself of significance, so one can only argue that it has some scientific validity. But it doesn't; it was just a bit of ephemeral fun organised by the newspaper and didn't even pretend to follow rigorous statistical procedures.
The reliability of Ynet is irrelevant here, since nobody is questioning that they reported their own poll correctly. More important is what secondary sources wrote about it: apparently very little. Zerotalk 13:49, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Zero that as to the (former) article on the Ynet poll issues like scientific validity are irrelevant. I also agree with Zero that the media polls in the above list are analogous to the Ynet poll.
As to the level of "significance and notability" needed for the one-sentence inclusions of text that have been deleted, that level is of course different than the test as to whether a subject deserves an entire stand-alone article. Obviously, it's not as though every sentence in an article has to rise to the level of significance needed to pass AfD -- if that were the case, we would delete most of the text in the Project.
Zero's personal opinion is that the sentence is trivial. I think (personally) much of wp is trivial; still, we cover it. And the number of editors reading that particular poll article on a daily basis, as referenced in the AfD, indicated interest by our readership far above the trivial level.
Zero's guesses -- and let's be clear, what he states after he writes "Consider" above is pure, made-up guesswork -- are simply non-substantiated musings. And we cover all manner of polls at wp, including those listed above, that ... if Zero's approach were taken ... could result in deletions based on POV guesswork of massive amounts of information resident on the project. Because editor x "assumes" the poll was "just fun," and editor b assumes it was not rigourous enough in its statistics. For an editor to make such a personal series of assumptions and engage in mass deletions on that basis in such a sensitive area is surprising, for a seasoned editor..
Plus, this is a poll of a top-level RS, Ynet. Such a poll of course has a higher level of notability than would be the case with a poll of a non-RS.
Zero's malignment of the poll, again by making up assertions that this was "just a bit of ... fun", and that it "didn't even pretend to follow rigorous statistical procedures", is simply empty POV conjecture meant to support his position. Though he presents it as fact, which I again find surprising for a seasoned editor, deleting text from 150 articles, in a senstive area.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I stand by my claims, which are not guesswork at all (and wouldn't be guesswork even if I didn't have professional expertise in statistics). Online "polls" like this are a dime a dozen and lots and lots of newspapers and online sites run them all the time. Enjoy them by all means, just don't take them seriously. Zerotalk 01:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Ynet is the online portal for Yedioth Ahronoth, consistently one of Israel's most widely read newspapers. The poll is in a reliable and verifiable source and it belongs in these articles, period. End of discussion. Listing such a ranking in an article about a notable individual is pretty much how Wikipedia works. There is no need to show that an article or survey is statistically valid or random, nor is there any obligation to show that an article or survey is covered by other media. These arguments have zero validity as excuses to remove sourced content. Alansohn (talk) 15:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The survey is notable within the article of Ynet, and there is a section devoted to it in that article. Just because the survey is notable within the article of Ynet does not mean that it is notable in the 200 biographical articles that the survey mentions. Yonideworst (talk) 15:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Completely false. What you are insisting is that a published article can only appear in the Wikipedia article for the publisher. So an article published by Ynet / Yedioth Ahronoth could only appear in the Wikiedpia articles for Ynet / Yedioth Ahronoth and an article published by The New York Times could only appear in the Wikipedia article for The Times, which is complete nonsense. Wikipedia works by including coverage from reliable and verifiable sources in our articles and this survey meets that standard. The notability standard has no relevance here. Alansohn (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The Ynet article says that "[d]ue to the nature of the poll used to select and rank the Israelis, the results do not pretend to be an objective assessment". Therefore, there is really no reason to include the results of the survey in the biographical articles. It was published for fun. It has no bearing on the biographies of the listed people. Yonideworst (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
To address the secondary source issue, newspapers are secondary sources for news they report. In the case of this survey, Ynet is not reporting news, but generating news. Hence, that makes Ynet the primary source for this survey. Had other news organizations reported on this survey, it would have given this survey more notability. As it currently stands, this survey has no notability outside of Ynet. Yonideworst (talk) 16:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't need to be objective, nor is there any means of ranking that is not entirely subjective. "Fun" is not an obstacle either. It is an article published in a reliable and verifiable source that is directly relevant to the persons involved. Alansohn (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have to disagree. If the survey was scientific, it would have been valid to add a "public perception" section to all those biographies and place the information in that section (in many cases the survey was placed into an honor and/or rewards section, which was not appropriate). However, since the survey was not scientific it is not even worth mentioning in a "public perception" section of the biographies in question. Plain and simple, the survey is irrelevant to the 200 biographies.
Let me add that a WP:UNDUE argument could be made regarding the way this survey is presented in the Ynet article because a single survey is not worth an entire section on a news web site. If there was an Entertainment section to the article, the survey would be worth mentioning in a sentence or two in such a section. But given that the article is so weak, and it does not have an Entertainment section, I suppose that leaving the Ynet article the way it is would be OK. Yonideworst (talk) 17:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
This is a reliable and verifiable source, period. If you want to move it around in the articles in question, that may be appropriate, but removal is unjustified.It's a fairly broad survey and that's all it's presented to be. Given your limited editing experience, gaining greater awareness of fundamental Wikipedia policy will help here in the future. The relevance in the Ynet article itself is a separate issue and it's inclusion should be discussed at that article's talk page. Alansohn (talk) 17:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
For the last time, Ynet is a reliable and verifiable source for news. The survey is not news, and for the heavily detailed reasons provided above not notable outside of the Ynet article. Please do not re-add to the 200 biographies in question. Yonideworst (talk) 17:38, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Here is a sample of lists that are notable:

The Ynet survey doesn't even come close to the notability of the above sample of lists. Note that the above lists are not generated by non-scientific surveys. They are done by review boards and have received coverage by sources outside of the news organizations that created those lists. Yonideworst (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Alansohn, you seem to have a misconception. The fact that something appears in a reliable source does not imply that it should be in Wikipedia. The reliability of the source is only one of the requirements. There are also requirement like WP:WEIGHT, without which articles would fill up with megabytes of lightweight fluff that just happened to appear in reliable sources. An encyclopaedia article should be a brief and concise summary of the important reliably-published facts about the topic. Perhaps you can explain why it is important that Leah Rabin scored the 152nd fewest votes (meaning a mere handful) from a self-selected group of internet readers. Zerotalk 00:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
It is especially true when the survey doesn't even appear in the news section -- it was in the entertainment section. Per WP:RS, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact." This is why the survey is only notable within the Ynet article. Yonideworst (talk) 13:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for removing that pimple. trespassers william (talk) 00:48, 11 July 2014 (UTC)