Jump to content

Talk:Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 125.253.96.174 (talk) at 07:08, 16 November 2012 (→A criticism section is needed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

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

Template:Spoken Wikipedia In Progress

Toolbox

Hebrew/Arabic languages

The languages should appear like this:

{{Main|Arabic language|Hebrew language}}

Main articles: Arabic language and Hebrew language

a problem with the article

there are 2 photos of israeli air planes, i think they aren't such fit to this article, but to another who deals with israeli made weapons, thanks.

How Israel was established

So, won't you write something about how Israel was established?!, As far as i know, Wikipedia does accept all true things that you write, so go on and write about Israel and how Bloodthirsty it really is, of course i have read some other articles that talk about countries and how they were established, so we need you to show us how Israel was established and how many Palestinians has Israel killed, or you are afraid of something?, am i going to be blocked?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.18.152.150 (talk) 14:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The confrontational tone could be done without. 66.183.104.162 (talk) 02:38, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Israel was established by the declaration of its establishment. The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel. The US immediately recognized this as true. talknic (talk) 21:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
IP 46.18.152.150, I believe a brief summary of the establishment of the modern nation of Israel can already be found within this article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Independence_and_first_years. It would be much appreciated if you took the time to look if such information already exists before you request it be added. If you are looking for casualty count of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict#Fatalities_1948.E2.80.93present , which contains data on both Israeli and Palestinian deaths. You may also be interested in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947%E2%80%931948_Civil_War_in_Mandatory_Palestine#Beginning_of_the_Civil_War_.2830_November_1947_.E2.80.93_1_April_1948.29, which is an account of the beginnings of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, your statements regarding Israel show that your tone is decidedly biased against Israel, and per Wikipedia policy, is something you should seek to correct before making more edit requests or attempting to contribute content. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and as such, must provide information from a balanced point of view. Jonathanfu (talk) 06:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that part of the article could do with a slight rebalancing in that Palestinan motives are always implicit rather than explicit in the account. That leaves a lot of room for misunderstanding by readers from all sides. 138.251.234.158 (talk) 06:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i agree that we need to show the ethnic cleanising that the zionist paramilitaries commited against the palestinian people in the 1948 war — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.208.70 (talk) 21:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

bibliography

You may wish to add the following article to the bibliography: Kruger, Stephen, "The Two-State 'Solution': Self-Defeat 101" (2010), [1]. Tks. Vann2332 (talk) 04:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC) Vann2332[reply]

Why? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:55, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A new source for Statistics about Israel

Hello all,

Today I've launched a website containing 25,000 data series about Israel (all taken, with permission, from Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics):

http://statil.org/

All of the images and the data series on the site are licensed under CC, so to allow them to be included in Wikipedia. I hope people in this project will be interested in including more statistical graphs about the state of Israel.

With regards, Tal Galili (talk) 17:23, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 22 September 2012

1. Israels Capital Jerusalem should be in brackets () disputed. Not only Jerusalem. 2. Israel is not part of ASIA

Please fix this problems! Akaa100 (talk) 11:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done:
  1. There is a note next to Jerusalem that explains the controversy better than the word "disputed" would.
  2. Israel most certainly is in Asia. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:45, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Israel page vandalized with swastika

Someone vandalized the Israel page with a giant swastika. It needs to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.109.12 (talk) 16:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

where? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 16:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was template vandalism by Special:Contributions/12lobbykeep. They've already been blocked. If the flag is still visible the IP will need to clear their browser's cache. Sean.hoyland - talk 16:49, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Government"

The government should say "Parliamentary unitary state, br Ethnic democracy for a more concise description. IMO, it more correctly would have Ethnocracy last, being that it is more applicable in describing its relationship with the territory's indigenous population. However, as far as being official, the state of Israel is un-controversially described as an ethnic democracy. --Michaelwuzthere (talk) 18:14, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No comment on the content issue but I think you used an outdated or incorrect URL in your citation. The paper appears to be here. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any question about the fact that most RS do not call it an "ethnic democracy"? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Describing Israel as an ethnic democracy or ethnocracy is a fringe viewpoint. The overwhelming majority of reliable sources describe Israel as a parliamentary democracy. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:55, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the majority viewpoint, until established otherwise, is parliamentary democracy. The "ethnic democracy" viewpoint could be a feature in Criticism of the Israeli government. Cheers, --Dailycare (talk) 19:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A Jewish minority state, according to the Israeli Ministry of Finance

This new fact of "unparalleled importance" (according to Haaretz) deserves mention in the lead. Any suggestions where it might fit? Oncenawhile (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Based on what little I can see, since there is a pay wall, your link does not support the claim that Israel is a "Jewish minority state." The article claims that in the entirety of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, there are more non-Jews than Jews... but that area contains more than just the State of Israel. It includes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Forgive me for not wanting to go around into circles on who controls what and all of that, but the current legal situation is that Israel has not annexed these areas. Within the State of Israel, the population is 70-75% Jewish, hardly a minority. What I am guessing the article is getting at is that if all of the areas that Israel "controls" are included, thus including the entirety of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, you have to include some 4+ million non-Jewish Palestinians, and then Jews are not a majority. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 22:55, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention the 4% of Israelis (300,000), ethnically defined as "others", who are Russian-descendants of Jewish origin or family who are not Jewish according to rabbinical law, but were eligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return. So the Jewish population could be considered an 79% instead of 75%. By the way, Druze and Bedouins don't consider themselves Arabs nor Palestinians.--Sonntagsbraten (talk) 01:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's an opinion piece, so "unparalleled importance" is not according to Haaretz, but according to Akiva Eldar. I agree with OC above. You seem to have not read the article (or just the bit you can read) very carefully. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 06:48, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks OC. I will ignore NMMNG's false assertion. Here is the key quote:
"According to the Central Bureau of Statistics (which is subordinate to the Prime Minister's Office ), of the 12 million residents living under Israeli rule, the number of Jews is just under 5.9 million (as of April 25 ). Twelve million minus 5.9 million Jews equals 6.1 million non-Jews. In other words, between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, there is a pretty Jewish state as far as its laws and customs, but the reality is not so democratic. Foreign sources report that Jews had already become a minority in the area of the greater Land of Israel several years ago. From now on, it is an official statistic. There will certainly be those who argue that the 12 million includes the resident of the Gaza Strip, which Israel evacuated, and that I should have deducted 1.5 million people from the number of non-Jewish residents. But the 12 million, which does happen to include the residents of the Gaza Strip, is an official figure appearing on Ministry of Finance stationery. If this population "is not considered" for purposes of the demographic balance, the Finance Ministry should be so kind as to deduct it from the limit for receiving the tax breaks and from the balance of its income."
Hope that clears up your questions. Oncenawhile (talk) 08:06, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unless this is based on some new census that has not been released to the public, this does not answer my questions at all. There simply are not 12 million people living "between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea" unless you include the Palestinian Territories, and not just the State of Israel. The continued use of "Israeli rule" also makes me suspect this. There are an estimated 8 million people living in Israel, the state. There are 2 million non-Israelis living in the West Bank. There are 1.7 million living in the Gaza Strip. The only way you approach 12 million is to add all three numbers together. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 10:06, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To quote the article: "But the 12 million, which does happen to include the residents of the Gaza Strip, is an official figure appearing on Ministry of Finance stationery." So we could add a sentence such as "According to Israeli Ministry of Finance figures, Jews comprise a minority of the total population living under Israeli rule". OK? Oncenawhile (talk) 20:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, not OK. The article's numbers do not add up. In addition, by your own claim of their wording, they are still including the West Bank... meaning not just the State of Israel. Maybe if you can find some confirmation, especially something not behind a pay wall so that we can all see it? --OuroborosCobra (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the argument is that the West Bank and Gaza are part of Israel (the subject of this article), the detail about what the demographic composition of the total area is doesn't belong here. And I'll note again that this is an opinion piece, you can't use it to state facts. Perhaps if someone supplied the actual document he's talking about, we could see what it says. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 20:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, this (opinion, in Hebrew, probably not RS but read on) contains a link to the original MoF document Eldad is ostensibly using as a source. It does not include a figure of 12 million. The rest of his opinion piece is based on using a number that doesn't exist, then subtracting actual CBS figures from that to reach a conclusion. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Haaretz article is not an op-ed, it's a news article. And the link you referred to is not just "probably not RS". It's a transparant piece of propaganda (used Google Translate). With that said, I agree that the jewish minority fact does not belong in the lead and probably not in the rest of the article either. --Frederico1234 (talk) 11:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are mistaken about the Haaretz article, it's obviously an opinion piece, but as long as we agree that this stuff doesn't belong in the article, that really isn't important. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 17:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Onceinawhile, your suggestion is based on a misinterpretation of the article. What the article says is "A Ministry of Finance memorandum on the amendment to the law notes that in 2011 the population of Israel and the Palestinian Authority exceeded the 12 million mark, which enables manufacturers who market to these consumers to enjoy a tax break." That is to say, the figure includes the Palestinian Authority (as well as Gaza), which, as the memo makes explicit, is not part of the state of Israel.

What alarms Eldar is the expansionist factions of the Israeli government, that want all the territory of the West Bank incorporated into Israel. For the time being, those forces have not taken the steps to make that expansion, so it would be wrong to include the populations of Gaza and the Occupied Territories as part of Israel. The government is now considering implementation of a report that would indeed obfuscate the legal distinction between Israel and the West Bank (the Edmond Levy report), thus de jure annexing the West Bank. However, for the time being, such a change in the article would be premature. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know that it has no legal effect whatsoever, but the official website of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies (Australia) [2] on the page dealing with the Geography of Israel includes Gaza, the West Bank (Samaria and Judea) as part of Israel. Victoria [3], South Australia [4] and Western Australia [5] incorporate the page in their respective websites.Trahelliven (talk) 06:33, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cite_quick can avoid size/speed problems

The article "Israel" is one of several which are nearing the template include-size error, plus some exceeding the 60-second timeout to cause "wp:Wikimedia Foundation error" because {cite_news} or {cite_web} is too slow/large to be used over 350-400 times per page. Another over-size article is "Arab Spring" or "2011–2012 Egyptian revolution". Currently, new Template:Cite_quick can be used to reduce the size/speed problem, to be coded in the article as {{cite quick |news|...}}. Now, other editors have come to support progress, and we can again continue to streamline those huge articles. Next year, when the Lua script cites are installed, then the {cite quick|news} usage can be edited to remove "quick|" and use the new, faster Lua-based {cite_news} which seems to run about as fast and small as {cite_quick}.

If there are no other concerns, then in a few days, I can change the citations in the article to use {cite_quick} and reduce the edit-preview, or reformat, time of the entire page from 45 seconds to within 14 seconds. -Wikid77 (talk) 19:30, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have things changed about the templates usage? And if so (point to conversation) why is the new coding not being implemented into the main cite template?Moxy (talk) 21:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite_quick for some pages while updating {cite_web} too risky: There have been 3 sets of TfDs for fast-cite templates. The final TfD, for Template:Cite_quick, was closed as "Keep" in use, with no restrictions because it works, where other templates fail for wp:CS1. Meanwhile, the plan to update {cite_web} from {cite_web/smart} was derailed by another TfD which renamed {cite_web/smart} as {cite_web/sandbox4}, and hence non-usable separately until "tested" for all 1.2 million articles using {cite_web}, as a formal upgrade systemwide. Meanwhile meanwhile, tests of {cite_quick} discovered alarming problems with invalid parameters in existing articles, where "author=" null would override "last=xx" to blank the author's name. It would be nice to update {cite_web} soon, but some/many articles depend on bugs in {cite_web}, and simulating those bugs in a new version is complex. Consequently, other users have considered {cite_quick} to be a "choice" as another citation style, where it does not need to mimic {cite_web} exactly, and can be used with slight differences. Whereas {cite_quick} has only 43 parameters with only billion trillions of combinations (43!=~6.0415e52), the complexity of {cite_web} has over 230 parameters, with umpteen zillion zillion combinations (230!=~7.76e444), which could not be tested fully if tests were run 1,000 per second since the dawn of time with the age of the universe. Only by using a new template within a few more articles, each time, can the results be safely tested, little by little. -Wikid77 (talk) 03:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an issue with it. What is really needed is the ability to create subpages where you can store the full reference info for each reference, and then simply refer to it in the article as <ref name="Blah"/>, and it would simply grab all of the reference information from the subpage. --Jethro B 00:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lua-based cites will be lightning-fast per second: I have spent weeks testing the Lua script cites planned for Spring 2013, running on test2.wiki, with Lua test2:Module:Citation, and can confirm rapid formatting, such as for article "Barack Obama" (see: test2:Barack_Obama). The Lua-based cites format at about 125-per-second, but perhaps could be improved to 200-per-second. At such rapid speeds, then the footnotes would be less of a problem. However, I like the idea of clicking on a small footnote which can link to a fuller note in a separate references page, as could be done with 200 basic footnotes which rarely change. For example, external footnotes could be numbered as "x1" or "x2" within the text: "Israel has a mixed climate[x1] [x2] with ocean, desert,[x3] and mountain regions" whereas the internal footnotes would avoid the "x" prefix. -Wikid77 (talk) 03:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The first part of your passage is complete gibberish to someone like me, with the fullest respect! While I have a background in computer programming and know HTML, XHMTL, CSS, and some JavaScript, I am not that advanced and am totally unfamiliar with this lua and test2.wiki stuff. Sounds very technical. Sorry!
    • As for the laat part, that's a good idea too, I wasn't even referring to that. I was thinking more of having a subpage for each article, where the full coding for each reference would be found. Then on the actual article, we'd just have a special short ref tag that we use, whose full code would be on the subpage. The reference itself would still be in the reference section, just the amount of coding on the page itself would be eliminated. Perhaps we should move this to a different venue? --Jethro B 04:36, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Imam in Istanbul clearly reflects Turkish foreign policy against Israel.

"Once Turkey grows strong enough politically and economically it will stop recognising Israel with the first chance, and once we do this Israel will be wiped off the map", Imam in Istanbul during the summer.

Thousands of reporters and commentators have made it clear that Turkey tries to find the chance -irrespective of goverment in power- to harm Israel and become the leader of the Muslim world. Of course someone must be very ignorant to beilive Turkey is a real democracy. The suppression of minority rights and the imprisonment of Islamist goverment's opponenets are two of the various indications that Turkey is controlled by an elit, and that elit plans the harm or even more advocates the destruction of Israel. There are many years that a religious fundamentalist sentiment is fuelling in Turkey, is not something recent. And of course this is reflected by the current goverment in power also. Turkey through its established membership in NATO steadily undermines Israel's stance in Europe and the US. Its links with European and US military is a clear indication that Turkey is more harmful than any other Israeli enemy.

Anyways when I find the artcile that writes about this event I will post it in Foreign Policy section! — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 17:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Imam's are not government officials in Turkey. They do not set policy. If all you can find are Imam's speeches, then your content will not make it into the article. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 17:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly - our article will indicate that foreign-policy relations between Turkey and Israel are those reflected by the balance of reliable sources, and unless these state that the opinions of a particular Imam are of any significance, we won't. And in future, please give new sections neutral headings, rather than using them as a platform for your obsession. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A criticism section is needed

Very, very badly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.149.187.98 (talk) 17:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't. Encyclopaedic articles don't have separate 'criticism' sections, but incorporate such material into the remainder of the text. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Criticism_section. 216.149.187.98 (talk) 16:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anon, to give you the benefit of the good faith, please give us a list of existing country articles with criticism sections so we can judge how to create one per WP format. With some lite surfing, I couldn't find any. --Shuki (talk) 20:05, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the list of independent states article, Israel seems unique in that it is the only one with 33 countries that don't recognise it. The other countries on that list either have no other countries that don't recognise them, or just one. There is no other country like Israel on earth, its unique, so your argument about other country articles not having criticism sections does not apply 125.253.96.174 (talk) 07:08, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


There is no other country like Israel on earth, its unique, so your argument does not apply. 216.149.187.98 (talk) 20:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC)Taco[reply]

Can we start the USA criticism section yet? Apparently our democracy fails the Russian test...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2012/11/mil-121106-rferl01.htm Russian Election Report Concludes U.S. Vote Will Be Neither Free Nor Fair

Duh, of course a billion dollar election isn't "Free". Hcobb (talk) 20:49, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop trying to change the subject, if you have a problem with the US take it up on that page 216.149.187.98 (talk) 21:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What's the issue here, exactly? If 98 is suggesting that there should be a section in this article entitled "Criticm of Israel", then we should be discussing what we'd write in this section, based on which sources. There are several articles that deal with aspects of Israeli policy that have drawn criticism, such as Criticism of the Israeli government. Why not use those? --Dailycare (talk) 20:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, these articles complain about the actions of the government, not the land. What exactly would be the criticism of the country? "Dry and full of fanatics"? Wouldn't that just mark it as a typical Middle Eastern country? Hcobb (talk) 20:55, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No need for POV in the article and as for the Anon claim that there is no other country like Israel so only in her case criticism section is required -I think he would have to explain why we don't have one on Iran, Syria, Pakistan (which want to execute mentally retard 12 years old child for tearing the Koran and even that according to only one eye witness) Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, N.Korea and the list can go much longer if the one who roll his eyes up and want us to push his anti-Israeli agenda into the article insist. --Gilisa (talk) 07:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Other_stuff_exists According to this wiki law, then Encyclopaedic articles do indeed need it. Especially the sort where people are trying to Game the system of wiki as it did here "August 18, 2010). "Wikipedia editing courses launched by Zionist groups". The Guardian. Retrieved February 16, 2012." So agreed, there definatly should be a criticism section displaying the sourced facts about the racism in israel and the anti-non jewish policies that is being kept. Not just as a seperate article itself ONLY. Especially the anti-non jew part should be added, the human rights record on controlling the press by violence is just another example http://www.btselem.org/beating_and_abuse/20120913_assault_on_jornalists_in_kafr_qadum 109.225.103.178 (talk) 12:37, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Criticism (essay) - "Avoid sections and articles focusing on criticisms or controversies".Moxy (talk) 17:47, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

Its not KISHINEV POGROM but CHISINAU POGROM. KISHINEV is not the official name of Chisinau (Republic of Moldova) anymore. --Octavix (talk) 12:53, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should be taking up this issue on the page for Kishinev pogrom, but to answer your question, the most commonly used term in cited sources use "Kishinev" after the Russian spelling and pronunciation (as the Russian name was the official usage during the pogrom, when Chişinău was part of the Russian Empire). Unless a consensus of reliable sources begins to use "Chişinău pogrom" as a name, it will not pass into the wiki's usage. If you can find a source using "Chişinău pogrom", that can be provided as an alternative name in-article. Benjitheijneb (talk) 22:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Israel&oldid=523286448"