Jump to content

User talk:HG1/workshop/Synthesis of AoIA arguments: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
moved in PR comments. Reply on groundrules. Q to PR about notability of Israeli Apartheid
Line 20: Line 20:
*'''Comment''' - no matter how unfair it might be, you cannot get away from the fact that people are now refering to Israeli Apartheid. How you treat that in an encyclopedic fashion I don't know - but I suspect you've not much wriggle-room to escape the core of what this article needs to be about. The more you write, the more I think "Not too much wrong with what we've got". [[User:PalestineRemembered|PalestineRemembered]] 22:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC) ''move from synthesis page in NPOV section [[User:HG|HG]] | [[User talk:HG|Talk]] 14:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - no matter how unfair it might be, you cannot get away from the fact that people are now refering to Israeli Apartheid. How you treat that in an encyclopedic fashion I don't know - but I suspect you've not much wriggle-room to escape the core of what this article needs to be about. The more you write, the more I think "Not too much wrong with what we've got". [[User:PalestineRemembered|PalestineRemembered]] 22:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC) ''move from synthesis page in NPOV section [[User:HG|HG]] | [[User talk:HG|Talk]] 14:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
::Ok. Are you saying people refer to 'Israeli Apartheid' as a phrase, or -- more generally -- referring to the concept of apartheid in connection with Israel? From what I've seen, the phrase itself is far less notable, with fewer high quality sources, than the general comparison/analogy/association of Israel and apartheid. For this reason, I agree that B-Type titles are needed to include "apartheid" and that C-type titles (omitting the concept) won't gain consensus. Do you see what I mean? [[User:HG|HG]] | [[User talk:HG|Talk]] 14:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
::Ok. Are you saying people refer to 'Israeli Apartheid' as a phrase, or -- more generally -- referring to the concept of apartheid in connection with Israel? From what I've seen, the phrase itself is far less notable, with fewer high quality sources, than the general comparison/analogy/association of Israel and apartheid. For this reason, I agree that B-Type titles are needed to include "apartheid" and that C-type titles (omitting the concept) won't gain consensus. Do you see what I mean? [[User:HG|HG]] | [[User talk:HG|Talk]] 14:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Like you, I'm not convinced that many people currently use the phrase "Israeli apartheid". But I think the concept of apartheid is firmly linked to Israel eg the hated Google test gives 18,000 hits for [israel "apartheid regime" -africa -african]. I know that doesn't sound like a huge number, but then "apartheid regime" only picks up a small number of the specifically Israel-linked occurences of "apartheid". Ultimately, I think criticism of Israel will become much more widespread than it is now, it will centre on "apartheid" and the article will be re-named "Israeli apartheid". In the meantime, "Allegations of Israeli Apartheid" is somewhat clumsy, but it's the least bad option we have (as proved in endless discussions, recently driven more by POV-disruptiveness than anything else). [[User:PalestineRemembered|PalestineRemembered]] 08:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


==== Neutrality Grounds to Change the Title ====
==== Neutrality Grounds to Change the Title ====

Revision as of 08:38, 4 September 2007

Feel free to use this Talk page to discuss how we can best synthesize and describe, in a neutral manner, the arguments about whether and how to change the name of Allegations of Israeli apartheid.

  • Please sign your comments on this page. Please do not sign your comments in the synthesis, thanks!
  • Not. This is not a poll. This is not the Talk page in which to discuss how to edit the article. This is not a general forum for discussing apartheid in relation to Israel.
  • Groundrules. Assume good faith, be civil, etc. Avoid uncivil statements, the motives of interested parties (including good faith and WP:POINT concerns), history of editing and AfD disputes, etc. If you believe that comments above might not fit these suggested groundrules, please notify that person via User Talk (preferably not here). If you come to realize you've said something outside the scope of the preceding subsections, please strike out your words and, if you choose, pursue your point elsewhere. This will benefit all parties, thanks!

To facilitate an orderly discussion, it is recommended that comments be placed under appropriate matching headings to the Synthesis page. You are welcome to change or ignore this idea.

General comments about this effort

Purpose and Groundrules

  • Comment - scrap the ground-rules - this is your private page, delete anything that's unhelpful and just remind the participant on their own TalkPage of what you've done. The only thing you should not be deleting is documented evidence that you are not (for instance) counted the votes or quoted participants honestly (and you're not going to cheat like that anyway!). The vital point here is to produce something easily understandable, with tabulated "proposals", "votes" and bowdlerised comments. Again, delete this my idea wot I have when you've taken on board everything wot I've told you. PalestineRemembered 22:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
PR -- I'm hopeful that someday this will be moved from a private page to an AoIA or CentralizedApthd Talk page, so I'd like to keep the ground-rules. I'm ambivalent about your idea of a vote and reasoning tabulation by individual user but welcome anyone else to add such a section to the synthesis. HG | Talk 14:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability Grounds for Topic(s) under the Title

  • Comment - no matter how unfair it might be, you cannot get away from the fact that people are now refering to Israeli Apartheid. How you treat that in an encyclopedic fashion I don't know - but I suspect you've not much wriggle-room to escape the core of what this article needs to be about. The more you write, the more I think "Not too much wrong with what we've got". PalestineRemembered 22:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC) move from synthesis page in NPOV section HG | Talk 14:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Are you saying people refer to 'Israeli Apartheid' as a phrase, or -- more generally -- referring to the concept of apartheid in connection with Israel? From what I've seen, the phrase itself is far less notable, with fewer high quality sources, than the general comparison/analogy/association of Israel and apartheid. For this reason, I agree that B-Type titles are needed to include "apartheid" and that C-type titles (omitting the concept) won't gain consensus. Do you see what I mean? HG | Talk 14:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Like you, I'm not convinced that many people currently use the phrase "Israeli apartheid". But I think the concept of apartheid is firmly linked to Israel eg the hated Google test gives 18,000 hits for [israel "apartheid regime" -africa -african]. I know that doesn't sound like a huge number, but then "apartheid regime" only picks up a small number of the specifically Israel-linked occurences of "apartheid". Ultimately, I think criticism of Israel will become much more widespread than it is now, it will centre on "apartheid" and the article will be re-named "Israeli apartheid". In the meantime, "Allegations of Israeli Apartheid" is somewhat clumsy, but it's the least bad option we have (as proved in endless discussions, recently driven more by POV-disruptiveness than anything else). PalestineRemembered 08:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality Grounds to Change the Title

Self-identification & the phrase "Israeli apartheid"

  • Comment - "apartheid" is an Afrikaans word that describes the system that South Africa operated from 1948 until 1993. But it's essential nature, "apart-hood", is directly translateable into English (there may or may not be a similar meaning in Hebrew, hafrada). Apartheid involves dividing your population up by the "community" to which each individual belongs, and issuing different identity cards to each group. The consequences might be benign (though we suspect they're not, and in fact we suspect they're oppressive in every possible situation - eg "seperate but equal"). However, discussing the effects in terms of "bantustans" or "settler roads" or whatever is a side issue - the fundamental meaning of apartheid is "identity cards linking people to their race/colour or religious community". For better or worse, Israel is probably the best known practitioner of this system - perhaps more significantly, Israel is the only one in which the "allegation" itself of apartheid comes up (rather a lot). There are other likely candidates (the Russians over the Chechens, Han people colonising Tibet and Chinese peasants unable to move to cities?). However, documenting it for other nations is a problem, since we'll apparently be dependent on primary sources, as what we should avoid. PalestineRemembered 22:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other Grounds when Changing the Title

Analysis of specific alternative terms and titles

List of candidates for a new title