Talk:Pierre Rehov: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:45, 27 July 2007

Palestine Start‑class Low‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.

Such a crap to add this to this article:

"However, his opponents maintain that international organizations such as Reporters Without Borders keep telling on the wounding of journalists by IDF's firings ( http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=20764)."

WHy is it there? While: The country’s journalists enjoy a freedom not found elsewhere in the region, but though 2006 was one of the safest years for them since the start of the second Intifada in 2000, many problems remain. (Israel - Annual Report 2007 ) http://www.rsf.org/country-43.php3?id_mot=153&Valider=OK

and: Since Hamas came to power in January 2006, journalists have faced the usual shooting from Israelis and, more recently, have been victims of fierce clashes between supporters of the Islamist Hamas and El Fatah, which supports President Mahmoud Abbas. Palestinian Authority - Annual Report 2007 http://www.rsf.org/country-43.php3?id_mot=155&Valider=OK

btw, reading the first article "the usual shooting" appears to be mainly clash related unlike the kidnappings and such in areas such as Gaza.

Removed rebuttal to criticism

I've removed the following as POV. It is completely improper to baldly assert that rehov's point of view is "closer to the facts" than others with no sources to back this up. Similarly, asserting that it was impossible for Israeli soldiers to have killed Muhammad al-Durrah is a much stronger claim than is made in the Muhammad al-Durrah article itself. I'm keeping these here because it should be possible for these rebuttals to be restored if sourced and ascribed to a particular person or group.

Allthough, in many occasions it has been proven that his point of view was much closer to the facts than most pro-Arab clips. For instance, his film "The road to Jenin" sticks to the number of casualties, acknowledged by both Palestinians and Israelis, and has been used as a proof in Justice against Mohammad Bakri's " Jenin Jenin ", which was advocating the theory of a " massacre ".

His work on the Muhammad al-Durrah event was also controversial. But later events indicate that it was actually impossible for Israeli soldiers to have killed this child, whose death was only witnessed by one Palestinian, namely the reporter who accused Israel of this death.

--Saforrest 17:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"States" vs. "Claims"

"Claims" is a non-neutral word. "States" is neutral. Please respect WP:NPOV. Jayjg ^(talk) 15:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Claims" is appropriate since what he is claiming is itself non-neutral.--Kitrus 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it's your opinion that it's non-neutral. Nevertheless, WP:NPOV requires that we use neutral terms when describing positions. See WP:NPOV#Fairness_of_tone. This is policy, so please stop ignoring it. Jayjg ^(talk) 12:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the following WP:BLP violation to the Talk: page for now:

Pierre Rehov is criticized by anti-Zionists for a lack of objectivity and depth. His work systematically depicts Israelis as victimized protagonists, and Palestinians as manipulative aggressors.[1]

User:Kitrus added the link at the end of the paragraph, but the source makes none of the claims that are actually in the sentence. Jayjg ^(talk) 15:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added the N.Y. Times link several months ago, found it deleted (I wonder why) and re-added it recently without re-reading it. Another source should replace it as a reference to the claim of bias. Rehov is clearly biased.--Kitrus 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First you have to find a link that actually supports your claim, though. Do you have such a link? Please abide by WP:V, which is policy. Jayjg ^(talk) 12:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Pierre Rehov is not neutral and neither is this article. Please apply WP:NPOV standards when editing.--Kitrus 04:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you actually read the policy? You're doing the exact opposite; you're asserting your personal opinions as fact, rather than what I have done, which is attribute the opinions to the people who have stated them. Please explain which statements in the article you think fail WP:NPOV. Jayjg ^(talk) 12:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

Jaakobou, since you won't stop trying to insert your Zionist-centric views into this article, I've decided to delete the referenced to Hannity & Colmes altogether. What partisans might be saying in support of their ideological brethren does not constitute ostensibly impartial commentary (of the type exemplified by the NYT review, as pointed out by 151.201.141.132), and violates WP:NPOV. Your blatant and transparent attempt to muddy the water by comparing third party criticism for Rehov's filmmaking with partisan cheerleading is illegitimate and agenda-driven and has no place here.Stingray86 19:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Stingray86[reply]

Revision as of 19:42, 27 July 2007 edit Stingray86 (talk \| contribs) 45 edits Criticism ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:45, 27 July 2007 edit undo Stingray86 (talk \| contribs) 45 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 50:		Line 50:
	== Criticism ==		== Criticism ==

	Jaakobou, since you won't stop trying to insert your Zionist-centric views into this article, I've decided to delete the referenced to Hannity & Colmes altogether. What partisans might be saying in support of their ideological brethren does not constitute ostensibly impartial commentary (of the type exemplified by the NYT review, as pointed out by 151.201.141.132), and violates WP:NPOV. Your blatant and transparent attempt to muddy the water by comparing third party criticism for Rehov's filmmaking with partisan cheerleading is illegitimate and agenda-driven and has no place here.		Jaakobou, since you won't stop trying to insert your Zionist-centric views into this article, I've decided to delete the referenced to Hannity & Colmes altogether. What partisans might be saying in support of their ideological brethren does not constitute ostensibly impartial commentary (of the type exemplified by the NYT review, as pointed out by 151.201.141.132), and violates WP:NPOV. Your blatant and transparent attempt to muddy the water by comparing third party criticism for Rehov's filmmaking with partisan cheerleading is illegitimate and agenda-driven and has no place here.[[User:Stingray86\|Stingray86]] 19:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Stingray86