Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tag: Reverted
Line 61: Line 61:
:This article has material stating that some find BDS anti-Semitic whereas others do not. If German WP finds it convenient to reflect only one half of that material that's up to them. [[User:Selfstudier|Selfstudier]] ([[User talk:Selfstudier|talk]]) 10:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
:This article has material stating that some find BDS anti-Semitic whereas others do not. If German WP finds it convenient to reflect only one half of that material that's up to them. [[User:Selfstudier|Selfstudier]] ([[User talk:Selfstudier|talk]]) 10:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
:[[User:91.113.101.154|@91.113.101.154]] Strange, because on October 10, this information is included at the end of the section Geldgeber (donors). [[User:Munfarid1|Munfarid1]] ([[User talk:Munfarid1|talk]]) 20:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
:[[User:91.113.101.154|@91.113.101.154]] Strange, because on October 10, this information is included at the end of the section Geldgeber (donors). [[User:Munfarid1|Munfarid1]] ([[User talk:Munfarid1|talk]]) 20:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
This article takes the BDS claims as fact. BDS is base don the Kristalchallent.[[User:Actoreon1|Actoreon1]] ([[User talk:Actoreon1|talk]]) 17:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:36, 20 February 2023

"Israel has a terrible brand..."

This should be re-phrased. Drsruli (talk) 23:05, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To what? Selfstudier (talk) 23:13, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Something understated and less personal. Passive phrasing is appropriate here. Maybe something like "Israel's brand equity has suffered due to..." Drsruli (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source says "Israel's brand is by a considerable margin the most negative we have ever measured" and "If Israel's intention is to promote itself as a desirable place to live and invest in, the challenge appears to be a steep one." and "52% of respondents believed that Israel had a negative influence on the world while a Gallup poll among EU citizens in 2003 found that Israel was perceived as number one threat to world security." which has been summarized as "terrible". We could provide the direct quotes instead of a summary. Alternatively, do you have a source saying "Israel's brand equity has suffered due to..."? or else a source we could add saying it has improved since the dates given in that 2020 source. Selfstudier (talk) 16:57, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Could also phrase it as "[Source] says that "Israel's brand is by a considerable margin the most negative" that they have ever measured." (As you say, using direct quotes.)
As far as what I suggested, I was paraphrasing what was already there. A brand is measured by its "equity".

(Presumably, if the brand is bad, then it has poor brand equity, that being the measurement of value of a brand.) "Brand equity is the measurable totality of a brand's worth and is validated by observing the effectiveness of these branding components." (Otherwise, would need to explain why it's "terrible" but yet has good equity.)

Drsruli (talk) 05:05, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Attribution and direct quotes as discussed. Selfstudier (talk) 09:27, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second Paragraph

Extended content
OT

Wikipedia is stating that the BDS is modeled after South African targeting apartheid. That is POV and taking the BDS talking points as factss. Since Israel is a non apartheid state and Palestinians are not part of Israel is does not apply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.9.220.42 (talk) 12:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the BDS is modeled after South African targeting apartheid That's what the source says. If you have a source saying it is modeled after something else please bring it. Selfstudier (talk) 12:48, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is what BDS claims. but the fact is that BDS targets Jews.204.9.220.42 (talk) 18:55, 27 November 2022 (UTC) https://www.jewishpress.com/news/us-news/ny/bds-the-new-kristallnacht/2016/10/13/204.9.220.42 (talk) 18:56, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An oped by a politician is not a useful source. Selfstudier (talk) 15:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And an oped by a right-wing politician in a Kahanist journal is never an acceptable source. RolandR (talk) 20:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As the source wikipedia is political, the Jewish press should be given equal weight.

Suggest we put both definitions on the page so description is not the BDS POV. Say BDS describes itself as based on South African apartheid and detractors say based on Kristalchallant.204.9.220.42 (talk) 16:52, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison with the Night of Broken Glass is extremely offensive to Jews and non-Jews alike. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:21, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is this article antisemitic?

It says here that Israel invests a lot of money to shape the public perception of bds as antisemitic.

The german bds article states that bds is antisemitic. I asked them on their discussions page why they didn't include the facts that Israel runs a campaign against bds. They told me these accusations are antisemitic and I need to be more "careful".

So, is this english article antisemitic? 91.113.101.154 (talk) 09:19, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article has material stating that some find BDS anti-Semitic whereas others do not. If German WP finds it convenient to reflect only one half of that material that's up to them. Selfstudier (talk) 10:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@91.113.101.154 Strange, because on October 10, this information is included at the end of the section Geldgeber (donors). Munfarid1 (talk) 20:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article takes the BDS claims as fact. BDS is base don the Kristalchallent.Actoreon1 (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]